Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Tuesday 28 January 2025, 6:00pm

Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Tuesday, 28th January 2025 at 6:00pm

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Twitter

Forums

Speakers

Feedback

Votes

Speaking:

Welcome to Folkestone and Hythe District Council's Webcast Player.

UPDATE - PLEASE NOTE, MEETINGS OF THE JOINT TRANSPORTATION BOARD AND FOLKESTONE AND HYTHE DISTRICT AND PARISH COUNCILS' JOINT COMMITTEE WILL BE STREAMED LIVE TO YOUTUBE AT: bit.ly/YouTubeMeetings.

The webcast should start automatically for you, and you can jump to specific points of interest within the meeting by selecting the agenda point or the speaker that you are interested in, simply by clicking the tabs above this message. You can also view any presentations used in the meeting by clicking the presentations tab. We hope you find the webcast interesting and informative.

Please note, although officers can be heard when they are speaking at meetings, they will not be filmed.

At the conclusion of a meeting, the webcast can take time to 'archive'. You will not be able to view the webcast until the archiving process is complete. This is usually within 24 hours of the meeting.

Start of webcast

Share this agenda point

Cllr Laura Davison
Mr Jake Hamilton
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Connor McConville
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Jim Martin

2 Declarations of Interest

Share this agenda point

Declarations of Interest

3 Minutes

Share this agenda point

Minutes , 03/12/2024 Overview and Scrutiny Committee

4 Minutes of the Finance and Performance Sub-Committee

Share this agenda point

Minutes , 26/11/2024 Finance and Performance Scrutiny Sub-Committee

5 Cabinet Member update

Share this agenda point

Cabinet Member Update

Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr John Wing
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr James Butcher
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr James Butcher
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Bridget Chapman
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Mr Ewan Green
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Alan Martin
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr James Butcher
Cllr Jim Martin
Dr Susan Priest
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison

6 Creation Of Folkestone & Hythe Youth Forum

Share this agenda point

OSC Report on Youth Forum 28.01.25 v2

Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Anita Jones
Cllr Connor McConville
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Bridget Chapman
Cllr Laura Davison
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Cllr Bridget Chapman
Cllr James Butcher
Cllr Anita Jones
Mr Ewan Green
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Cllr Laura Davison
Folkestone & Hythe Officer
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr John Wing
Cllr Laura Davison

7 Otterpool Park: Strategic Direction, Funding & Delivery FY 25/26

Share this agenda point

Microphone B
Cllr Laura Davison
Microphone D
Microphone B
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Alan Martin
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Alan Martin
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Microphone B
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Alan Martin
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr James Butcher
Cllr Jim Martin
Microphone B
Cllr James Butcher
Microphone B
Cllr James Butcher
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr James Butcher
Cllr Jim Martin
Microphone B
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr James Butcher
Cllr Laura Davison
Microphone D
Dr Susan Priest
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr James Butcher
Microphone B
Microphone A
Cllr James Butcher
Microphone B
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr John Wing
Microphone B
Mr Ewan Green
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr John Wing
Mr Ewan Green
Cllr Laura Davison
Cllr Alan Martin
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Alan Martin
Microphone B
Cllr Laura Davison
Microphone B
Cllr Jim Martin
Cllr Laura Davison
Webcast Finished

Select an agenda point

Scroll with video

Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to this meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:00:07

The meeting will be webcast live to the internet. For those who don't wish to be recorded or

filmed you'll need to leave the chamber. For members, officers and others speaking at the

meeting it's important that the microphones are used so viewers on the webcast and others

in the room may hear you. Would anyone with a mobile phone please switch it to silent

mode as they can be distracting. I'd like to remind members that although we all have

matters under consideration,

it is important to treat members,

officers and public speakers with respect.

Good evening everybody.

Nice to see you all and we'll start

with apologies for absence.

Thank you chair.

We have apologies from Councillor

Mr Jake Hamilton - 0:00:45

Hills and Councilor Neita Jones has

notified us that she may be late.

OK, thank you and are there

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:00:51

any declarations of interest?

Council McConville declare an

interest as a member of the

Cllr Connor McConville - 0:00:59

and we withdraw for that item in the meeting.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any other declarations?

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:01:06

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:01:08

OK, thank you will move on to the

minutes of our last meeting.

Does anybody have any comments on the

minutes of our meeting held on Tuesday,

the 3rd of December?

If not, can I have a proposer?

Councilor Conville, a seconder.

Think I saw Councillor Chapman first.

Is that agreed, colleagues?

Thank you and our second set of minutes.

The minutes of the Finance and

Performance Subcommittee which took

place on the 26th of November.

Can I have a proposal for those please?

Council of Conville and a seconder

Councilor Butcher all those agreed.

Agreed. Thank you. Just sign those.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:02:03

Okay, so we're moving on to item five, which is our cabinet member update.

And this evening we're joined by Councillor Jim Martin, leader of the council and cabinet

member for Otterpool Park and Planning Policy, which is timely given the topics on the agenda

this evening.

So I'll pass to you first, Councillor Martin, if you want to give a brief overview, and

and then I'll invite colleagues to ask questions. Thanks.

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:02:29

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:02:36

All right. Oh, it's terrific.

Well, thank you very much, Chair.

And in line with your email,

1 Apologies for Absence

2 Declarations of Interest

3 Minutes

I'm happy to answer questions, Chair, on anything.

4 Minutes of the Finance and Performance Sub-Committee

5 Cabinet Member update

Not to be constrained,

my wider portfolio is very, very wide.

so happy to answer any questions essentially on anything.

But starting with planning,

our planning policy team are completely up to date.

Our call for sites has gone out.

We are getting responses in

and we should,

notwithstanding other things that may interrupt us,

We should be bang on track in terms of preparation of our next local plan, etc.

So no real problems there.

A highlight, I think, of planning performance

is the amount of enforcement action that we are taking.

Our enforcement officer is always busy.

But as those of you who come through Cheriton will know that the white lion, after so many,

many, many years, has got scaffolding around it.

And I will claim some credit for our planning enforcement team who have not, who shall we

say have helped the developer into a position where they feel it's economically viable to

repair that building.

So very, very pleased about that.

There are a number of issues around the district, particularly in rural areas with complex land

use and land ownership issues.

But our enforcement team are doing pretty well, I think, in terms of that.

So I'm very pleased about that.

Our day -to -day business of the planning offices is as busy as ever.

The bulk of our applications are, you know,

extensions and upward extensions and roof conversions, etc.

But of course, there are the very large planning applications,

one of which we have recently.

So I'm sure that will continue.

So, very, very happy to answer questions on planning,

or do you want me just to carry on, Chair?

I think if you carry on, and then we'll take questions at the end. Thanks.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:05:21

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:05:22

I am, yeah.

So, yeah.

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:05:27

So, moving on to my bit of Otipol,

I won't go into a lot of detail

with regard to the final item on the agenda.

But I will talk a little bit about the collaboration agreement

with Homes England.

Now this...

Just to go back,

when we first went in to see Homes England

back in the summer of 2023.

They said to us, what you've got to do, Jim,

is you've got to move Otterpool Park out of the basket case

and into the deliverable column,

because at the moment it's undeliverable.

So we've gone through an awful lot of work.

This council has gone through huge amount of work

just to do that, to put Otsefoul Park into the deliverable category.

And I believe we've done that. I think we're there.

And I think the kind of... the result of that,

or the mark of that, if you like, is Homes England coming to us,

wanting a collaboration agreement with us.

Now, you'll recall that from the subcommittee that you chaired,

that it's two months ago that we were talking about

their collaboration agreement and we've still yet to sign it.

It has been like pulling teeth.

But we think we are there or thereabouts.

We are interviewing the not one but two project managers that they want to install to monitor

and report back to them on their part of the collaboration agreement.

Why they need two project managers I really don't know but nevertheless we will be asking

them that on Thursday because we're meeting them.

But you know setting aside all of my moans and groans and complaints I think we're going

enter a collaboration agreement with Homes England

and that is a six -month agreement.

And within that time, before the end of six months,

they will tell us whether they are going to fund

what we want to do at Otterball.

So the idea of the collaboration agreement is to look at the future

and why we're doing it is to get access to government funding

and effectively they're the gatekeeper.

So that's what we're about.

I think we're in a very, very good position,

particularly where we were two years ago,

and I'm very confident that we'll be able to move on.

With regard to everything else, we have got a very good relationship with the what we

call the live parishes that make up Otipool.

We meet them regularly, they send representatives, we discuss everything that's going on, they've

always got their own ideas, they regularly tell me what we haven't done and what we need

to do, so I use that as a very useful mechanism.

Our Vice -Chair is smiling because obviously it's his walk,

so he's very familiar with these parish leaders.

I think that that's a very helpful mechanism for us,

and I'm very pleased to be part of that.

I attend the meetings personally,

so they feel that they're being acknowledged, as it were.

and so I'm very pleased about that.

In terms of local owners,

matters move on.

It must be a year ago now that I went to meet the largest

of our optioned land owners, Mr. Price,

and we have been busy seeking to renegotiate

some of these options, just to give us more flexibility

in terms of the future.

And generally, I think we're moving forward on all the routes.

The issues around what happens when are all determined

really by the wastewater treatment plant.

So we are anticipating that the planning application

for the wastewater treatment plant will go in

within the next few weeks rather than months.

And that application won't come to us.

It will go to KCC.

We are hoping for a very quick turnaround

on that application, although

I have had to get involved in just really making sure

that we get that back as quickly as possible.

The waste water treatment plant is the key that unlocks the door.

We have to have the waste water treatment plant in place.

Just as an aside, the government has provided £9 .8 million to KCC to mitigate the impacts

of phosphate and nitrates.

and the, I haven't said how much,

but they feel a chunk of that will come to Otterpool

as a contribution towards the measures

that we're providing through the wastewater treatment plant

in terms of cleaning the river stour.

Very, very important, the stour catchment,

and when the wastewater treatment plant is agreed

and is going forward, this will automatically release

a great deal of housing in both Ashford and Canterbury, which they are stuck on.

So this has really been a kind of sub -regional initiative that we've taken.

And so we're playing our full part in helping our neighbours move forward, which they're

very grateful for.

I'm happy to stop there for the time being.

Did you want to talk about bathing water quality as well?

Yeah, I think so obviously the committee had a session on bathing

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:12:38

water quality in the

autumn so it would be helpful just to I think catch up on where you've got to since then.

I think the other issue that I'd flagged was devolution and changes to local government

reorganisation, which I think this is maybe the first opportunity that there's been a

kind of session where people who might be watching can learn some information about

that.

So just flag those two things.

But if it's OK, I might open it up to people just to see if there are questions, and maybe

we can pick up those issues as we go through.

Are there any questions at this point?

Councillor Wing.

Thank you, Chair.

It's a wonderful comment.

The White Hart looks fantastic.

Cllr John Wing - 0:13:22

It's got a lovely shiny new roof.

From being an ex -Church resident, I know we're horrible.

I do wonder where the pigeons have all gone.

There must have been hundreds of pigeons living in there.

So I don't know whether they've been well done for getting that sorted after all these

years.

I do have some questions about what to pull, but we'll leave that to the proper debate.

Okay, thank you.

Councillor Butcher.

Thanks, Chair.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:13:45

So there's quite a question about planning, and I guess it's that experience residents

Cllr James Butcher - 0:13:48

sometimes have of putting comments on a planning application or concerns objections.

Those are dealt with, they're either rebutted or conditions are put in place and the development

goes ahead or whatever happens goes ahead and then you look back and think well actually

some of those concerns, objections were valid, haven't been dealt with by the conditions

or the conditions haven't been enforced.

And I wonder whether we ever look back on planning applications that have been agreed

to say has this actually turned out the way we thought it would

when we made the decision with the expectations we had?

Because I think there is a bit of I pick up from some people

in my ward as sort of a cynicism about the process.

So I guess it's about do we learn from how planning

applications turn out in practice?

Yes, certainly.

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:14:42

The planners are in a process of constant review because the last thing they want to

be is tripped up on the next planning application, as it were.

I get this exactly the same question to me all of the time.

And the problem is that we don't reply to...

Somebody puts an objection on the portal

and they think that's the end of it.

They all get read, they all get reviewed

and often you'll know from the planning meetings

the officers will do a summary of objections, as it were,

because often there may be many objections

but they would fall into maybe four main groups or something like that.

So they all get read, they all get reviewed.

If we tried to reply to all of the planning objections,

then we would need to employ an awful lot more planners.

So it's a real difficulty that people,

because they put it on the planning portal,

then they don't hear anything.

They feel that they've been ignored, but they're not.

The planning portal is red, it's gone through.

The process of review...

If he was here, Llewellyn would be the first person to say,

we don't get everything right all of the time,

but they try their best in terms of what happened previously,

what might happen next, etc.

So, while all we can do is reassure people that they do get read,

they do get reviewed, they do get included,

but we can't reply to every planning objection,

because sometimes on particular developments

there are literally hundreds and hundreds of objections.

Just to come back, I accept that it wouldn't be practical to do that.

Cllr James Butcher - 0:16:57

My question wasn't really about specific objections.

I suppose are we kind of learning from how developments happen in practice?

Not how it's talked about in here at Planning Committee.

This is how it's going to be and don't worry because this condition is good in place, therefore

you're safe to agree.

It's then, yeah, but what actually happened in practice and is the development that ended

what members imagined and what the community imagined

when they made that decision. I think it's that bit.

It's whether we're really learning what actually happens in practice

to reassure people that we're learning from our hands.

Well, that is certainly the intention.

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:17:37

You'll have to take a view as to whether you think that's happening or not,

but that is certainly the intention.

That's the way that it's designed to happen.

There will be... Planning is an unusual beast

in terms of often people will build things

that are slightly not in compliance with their planning permission.

And they get written to and they get talked to,

they get told off, whatever.

But the question comes back to us then,

Do we take action?

Do we spend local people's money on seeking to enforce that?

So the planners have a very, very fine judgement to make on that.

And it's often very, very, very difficult.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:18:34

Councillor Chapman.

Just to come in on that, I think I agree

Cllr Bridget Chapman - 0:18:41

that I'm definitely picking up on some cynicism too.

And I think that there's still possibly more work to be done

to help the community to understand how planning works.

I think that people think there are things they can object

on the grounds of that they're not actual grounds.

I think that just what you've said about,

sometimes things are not quite exactly as they should be,

but then the decisions made on balance,

whether we should follow up legally or not,

and is that a good use of public money.

And I don't think there's an easy solution to this,

but I just think it's something to think about,

how we can continue to develop the community's

understanding of the constraints that we work within.

You know, I think the big planning meeting

the other night was a really good example.

I think lots of the community still believe

that the decisions we were making the other night was,

I think they don't realize the difference

between outline planning commission

and the detail that comes afterwards

and the legal balance that's made

in terms of risking a challenge

and how much it's gonna cost.

So there's no easy answer to this, Jim, I know,

but I just think that that's something that we should,

All of us, as ward councillors talking to the community,

but maybe as a wider sort of comms strategy,

give people some kind of better understanding

of what the framework is that people are working within.

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:20:23

I completely agree with everything you've said, Bridget,

without any shadow of a doubt.

Interestingly, just to let you know,

Last night, in fact, was one of our regular planning forum meetings.

This is aimed specifically at parishes and towns

to help them understand their part in the process

and exactly what can you object to, what is a material consideration,

where can we go with this, etc.

Last night was the... I've been to all of them.

But last night was the busiest that we've had.

We had 26 people on there.

But I have to say, you know,

there was no -one from Hyatt Town Council on there.

There was no -one from Hopestone Town Council on there.

You know, so there was lots...

I think with respect there were people on there from the town council.

Oh, right.

I'm not saying there were enough, but there were certainly representatives.

OK, well, I'm sorry about that.

It's even more positive than you're saying, Councillor Martin.

But there should be...

You know, if...

You know, particularly people who are in the process,

the planning forum should be full of people, but it's not.

So you can only go so far in trying to, you know,

get people into the process in terms of attending planning forums, etc.

etc. It's a really, really, I mean, just to recommend it, it is a fantastic...

You had three senior planners there, two presentations,

one by Adrian Toffs and one by Rob Bailey,

and you could pay £600 a day to go to a seminar in central London

and you wouldn't get half the information that they gave last night.

Absolutely incredible.

But yeah, I stand corrected, Chair.

But, you know, everything that Councillor Chapman said is right.

It's just how we do it. That's really the issue.

So, and I'm open to suggestions.

I was there myself, so I can recommend it.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:22:38

Ewan, did you want to add something?

Thank you very much, Chair.

Mr Ewan Green - 0:22:43

I've arranged a very interesting views, members.

Thank you, and lots of things to take back.

but just to flag that planning and transparency in the planning process is on your forward plan.

So it will be an item for this committee I think in April where we will certainly consider

some of the points we made tonight and bring them back for further discussion.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:23:05

Yeah, thank you, that's helpful. Right, are there any other issues that...

So I'm going to take Councillor Martin because he's... Councillor Alan Martin,

not spoken yet first. It does get confusing, doesn't it? Thank you.

Cllr Alan Martin - 0:23:15

So also, sticking to planning.

So obviously we've got our local plan strategy,

housing targets.

Thinking ahead to the devolution and us sort of moving

into unitary councils, at this early stage do we have

any sense of how we would be expected to sort of transition

and rationalize those different plans?

So on things like housing targets, are they just gonna

add up the different housing targets and then it's up

for the unitary council to decide how they're spread out

So I guess the question is, what does that look like?

Have we got any guidance on it?

The fact that we know that's around the corner,

should that change our strategy in the meantime

versus what we've been doing?

Well, I mean, it's an extraordinarily interesting question

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:24:04

and it's not one that I've got a ready answer to.

So, devolution will affect everything.

It will change everything that we do.

It's not the devolution aspect,

it's the local government reorganisation aspect.

It will abolish us, so it will change everything.

Planning is one thing that has to be done through an area committee.

You cannot have the kind of granular feel that you need for planning

unless you understand where the sites are.

Our planning committee sometimes gets criticised

because we don't know enough about LID, about New Church,

about, you know...

And while we might know exactly, you know,

the streets in Fokston or Hyde.

So I think...

And there's nothing... The government hasn't said anything about this,

but I think that planning is something that every unitary

would have to create area committees to deal with.

They would have to come under.

So in exactly the same way as a parish or town

debates and has a view, as it were,

there would have to be area committees.

How that would work, I just don't know.

But ultimately,

ultimately the decisions would be taken elsewhere.

They wouldn't be taken in Folkestone, they'll be taken in...

a completely different question which Unitary are in,

whether it's Canterbury or Ashford or Dover or wherever,

but it's unlikely to be Folkestone.

So that's an extraordinary interesting question

and one that there is yet no indication

on how the government wants to deal with that at the moment.

Is that a question?

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:26:05

Yeah, I'm just thinking while we're talking about devolution and local government reorganisation,

it might be the moment just to ask you just to give an update on what the District Council

is doing, kind of behind the scenes at the moment in terms of preparedness and what we

know and timelines and things like that.

Can you keep it fairly brief?

Jim, if you wouldn't mind just consciously, we've got quite a few things to cover, thanks.

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:26:28

If you can just digest the whole of that, isn't there?

Okay, deep breath.

Right, so the 16th of December was the publication of the White Paper

and everything has happened since then, that's the thing.

So the Kent leaders have been meeting regularly.

Last week's Kent leaders meeting was fully attended.

All 14 leaders were there and I think 13 of the chief executives.

So very, very, very serious stuff.

It's happening, we're in it, there's no consultation, we're not being asked, we're in it.

And the first question was, would we join the priority programme?

Now the priority programme, the government want to select 10 or 12 two -tier systems to

to act as pathfinders, as it were.

And then the following year,

then they would have a template

which they would lay out for everybody else to comply with.

Kent have applied for this priority programme.

Now, just to say that Roger Gough,

the leader of Kent County Council, was very...

There's only two...

So Kent County Council had a debate and they decided to go for it.

Medway Council, who are the other unitary, also had a debate

and they decided to go for it.

Now, the fact that it's Wojciechow and Vince Maple,

and at the last leaders' meeting,

Vince, who is very well connected to the Labour hierarchy,

said, it is my working assumption that we will be in the priority programme.

So I'm taking that as close as you can get to,

that we will be in a priority programme.

So if we are in a priority programme,

we will have to put forward a proposal

by the end of March as to the formation

of the unitaries within Kent.

Now the debate at the last leaders meeting therefore

was about how many unitaries would there be in Kent.

In the white paper it quotes a figure of 500 ,000

as the ideal number of people in a unitary.

The population of Kent is between 1 .8 and 1 .9 million at the moment,

which would suggest three unitaries.

And as you may recall, because we were concerned that KCC might go skint last year,

we formed ourselves into three clusters, East Kent, West Kent and North Kent.

And they seem to be reasonable groupings, as it were.

However, now we've got the real question, how many unitaries do we form?

do we form three or do we form four?

Because if you take the population projections

over the next three or four years,

we very quickly get to 2 .1 million,

which would suggest four unitaries.

So if you say three or four,

who are the members of those unitaries?

This is something that I will be asking all councillors

to give some thought to. Which unitary should we belong to?

Now, at the moment we are in the East Kent cluster,

which is Fannock, Dover, ourselves, Canterbury and Ashford.

But Ashford don't necessarily fit very comfortably in that

and they are exploring other unitary opportunities, shall we say.

Our economic geography is mainly linked with Ashford.

So when you look at the travel to work, who travels where etc etc, it's between us and

Ashford followed by Dover.

We don't have a lot of economic geography with Canterbury.

We do have some but not a lot and then we have next to nothing with the planet.

So, what Ashford do really has an impact on us.

So, that's why I'm very happy to engage with Ashford at the moment

in terms of what they might do.

But we are a coastal district,

so it's going to be fairly challenging for us

to associate ourselves with others.

But there are other groupings being floated around.

But while I'll be happy to discuss those,

I'll be happy to engage with any sort of idea, as it were.

I will absolutely come back to full council

before we make any decision on that.

So that's where we are.

We're expecting today, or maybe tomorrow,

a letter from Jim McMahon, the Secretary of State.

And in that letter, they tell us whether or not we're in a priority programme.

If we are in a priority programme, then he will be bringing forward secondary legislation

to postpone our elections in Kent to give KCC an additional year, which in effect will

be a transition year to a shadow administration.

So there would be elections in May 2026 to a shadow administration.

And then once the shadow administration is created,

then there would be liaison transfer,

all sorts of things going on between us and the shadow administration,

and similarly KCC and the shadow administration.

So it is, you know, it will be extraordinarily busy.

At the same time, we have to integrate with our neighbours.

Whichever unitary we go into, we will have to integrate all of the housing,

we will have to integrate all of the IT, we have to integrate all of our finance systems.

And, you know, they'll all be different.

So it's going to be a monster challenge to actually get us all pushed together.

But at the moment, what I'll be coming back to members on is...

So that is what I would like members to really concentrate on,

is which unitary do we belong to.

Just as the work I have to do,

I'm pretty good on economic geography and travel to study and all that sort of thing.

The health geography.

Once you bring in hospitals and primary care units,

once you bring in a whole host of stuff,

let alone the stuff that the new unitary will be taking on,

like adult social care, it becomes a very different picture.

So it's going to be a challenge to all of us,

It's a challenge that, believe me, I'm not going to face alone.

Everyone is going to have to give me their opinion on this

because it is possibly the most important decision

we will make in 50 years,

which is really sort of boggling when you think about it.

So I'll shut up at that.

On that note, thank you.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:34:42

Right, I'll go back to members of the committee for any questions on that

or other things that people wanted to flag at this point.

Stunned into silence.

Our members of the committee, would it be helpful for

Councillor Martin just to give a brief update on bathing water quality

discussions and where those are at?

I can see nods.

Okay, thanks.

Sorry, Councillor Bichey, did you want to come in here?

Yeah, Jim, you were talking about, sort of coming back for Council,

Cllr James Butcher - 0:35:12

about the configurations and so on.

Is there some thinking going on about the sort of

processes for all the decision making that will go on,

working groups or, because there's going to be,

you identified some of the streams of things

that have to be figured out.

But I just wondered how members are going to get involved

in all of that.

Well, very interestingly, in the leaders meeting,

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:35:36

which ended at five o 'clock, our chief executive

was putting this problem exactly on the table.

how do we bring to you your decision making?

What do you decide?

How do we do that?

Fortunately, it's minds greater than me that will be trying to solve that problem,

but again, you know, Councillor Bush, you put your finger right on it.

You know, how do we get presented with this information

When we're talking about integrating with, for example, just a name like Dover,

we already have a combined waste contract with Dover,

so TIC, we can do that one relatively easy,

but there's a different waste management company in Canterbury and Fannock.

The Ashford have a similar agreement but with Swale.

So there's a... And how deep do members want to go?

Do we, you know... When we start on the finance,

in terms of do we want to all talk about software and how we...

You know, I mean, there are kind of major decisions

which we will have to make. There is no side -stepping it,

that we will have to make.

But you're going to have to...

We're going to all have to feed back to, not you, meet me as well.

We're all going to have to feed back to officers.

How granular we want to get into that decision -making process

because there are literally hundreds of thousands of decisions

that will spin out of this because it's everything.

You know, it's a lot.

Dr Priest, would you like to add anything to that?

Or do you think that's covered the complexity of the challenge before us?

Dr Susan Priest - 0:37:40

I think you've adequately covered the complexity.

The only thing I'd dare to add, if it's helpful for members,

is that we're really unclear about what are the decisions,

who are the decision -makers, what are the timeframes.

I think the commitment from the leader's been really clear

that he will go forward, taking all views on board

and we'll work out how we best do that with you.

But as I said at the moment,

the formal decision -making is just really unclear

because we haven't yet received correspondence,

even as of now, we still haven't received it.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:38:17

Let us know if it comes in during the course of the meeting.

OK, bathing water quality, please, Jim.

So, bathing water quality,

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:38:25

we will all know that the quality of our bathing beaches has been getting worse.

This primarily started with Little Stone and Dim Church and St Mary's Bay.

Very good news on St Mary's Bay this year in that it's ticked up in terms of its quality.

So the no swim notices can come down next season, which is great news.

But Sunny Sands, which arguably is our busiest beach,

if you took it per square metre,

missed poor.

The poor category is the no swim notice.

And it missed it by the skin of its teeth.

I mean, you know, so members will recall that we had a briefing from the Environment Agency

and Southern Water about what they're doing, what their plans are.

I purposely set out to have a non -confrontational meeting because I've been to other meetings

around St Mary's Bay and Little Stone where tempers really did get heated and things were

said that shouldn't be said.

So I really put the emphasis on that and I have to say Southern Water and the Environment

Agency responded very very well in terms of the quality of the information that they provided

to us.

So those of you that attended will know Southern Walter are going through their

misconnections process, what they call their lift and look.

So all manholes get lifted, all illegal connections get reconnected properly

at Southern Walter's expense, I'll add.

and generally it is, using their phrase,

trying to find a needle in a haystack.

Now, you'll recall that when we went on to the species markers

in terms of what it's causing,

the main problem is the E. coli.

The E. coli that flourishes under the seaweed or in the sand.

and where is the E. coli coming from?

And they take these species markers.

Now, the species markers were very, very important on the marsh

because you hear people blaming the farmers

that it's slurry pit run -off or that it's the sheep or it's the cattle or whatever.

So they've employed these species markers

so they can tell by examining the E. coli

which species it's come from.

Now, on sunny sands, it is overwhelmingly human.

There is some canine and there is avian.

So although there were comments from members,

we will, while Southern Water and the Environment Agency

are going through their processes we will also be employing measures that will restrict

dogs on sunny sands and also seek measures to reduce the number of seagulls. That will

be principally by trying to move some of the bins away from the back of sunny sands because

as they attract the seagulls.

But I'm open to ideas on this.

We all know anything that we can do to reduce...

But that's where the focus is.

It's human, predominantly.

There's nothing we can much do about that except support Southern Water

and in their misconnections process.

But Avian and Canine make a contribution.

The way that the bathing water quality assessment is made is on a four year rolling profile.

So what we have to do is we have to beat 2021 in order to keep the current approach.

If we fall below 2021, then we're in poor

and we have to put up no swim notices.

And for me, no swim notices on sunny sands is a flipping disaster.

So anything we can do to prevent that is what I'm going to do.

Thanks, Jim.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:43:39

Is there some kind of rapport or proposals around the actions

or the measures that the district council will be taking

in respect to the things that you referred coming forward?

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:43:51

Well, we're still in discussions with Southern North

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:43:54

but we can certainly bring something together.

There isn't a report being talked about,

but I think it would be a good thing to bring about.

So I'll take that suggestion away, Chair, and action it.

Okay, thanks.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:44:09

Any final comments or questions from councillors?

Nope, okay, well thank you, Councillor Martin.

Right, we'll move on to item number six,

of folks in the Hyde Youth Forum.

6 Creation Of Folkestone & Hythe Youth Forum

So this is obviously a topic that we've

discussed before as a committee,

so it's good to see this coming

back in front of us and we do have

two recommendations to consider to

receive a note the report and to

agree to recommend that youth forum

for the district is as created as

detailed in the report and so we are.

We've got Joe with us and who's going to introduce?

Oh, Councillor Martin, that's why you're still here.

I hadn't appreciated.

Please go ahead.

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:45:07

So, apologies, Chair, for me droning on in my...

But this is really, really good news.

I am something of a fraud introducing this

because I have only attended the meetings

and nodded in the right places, to be true.

This is such a flipping good idea

that it really delivers itself.

But it does give me an opportunity

to give great thanks to the team

that have engaged and have pushed this forward

really, really well.

Really, really pleased with the work

that's been done thus far.

But my main thanks must go to our chair,

Councilor Jones who has pushed this through from day one.

And I don't think we would have made the progress

that we had only for your tenacity and determination

to get this on the agenda.

So with those thanks, Chair, I'm sure you've all read

the report, I doubt if there's anyone in,

I'll be surprised if there's anyone in the room who disagrees with any of this.

Young people are the single most discriminated group in society

and anything we can do to help and support them, I'm in favour of.

So I'll leave it at that, if that's okay.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:46:35

Thanks, Jim. Okay, I'll open it up.

Councillor Jones.

I just want to add my thanks to Jo actually for taking this forward.

Cllr Anita Jones - 0:46:47

I know we discussed the idea of a youth council before,

but this is obviously a really good way to push it forward.

It's complicated.

We had a really good trial of this during the corporate plan meetings

and we had three schools in here and it was such a positive experience.

the young people just loved the opportunity to have their voices heard and to debate in

here actually and we had some really good debates so I'm really looking forward to seeing

what we can do with this and what we can get back from young people and then feed into

our plans for the future so thank you and thank you as well for taking that forward.

Councillor McConville.

Cllr Connor McConville - 0:47:37

Thanks, it's great to see this finally where it is after nearly two years.

So never say never I guess.

So when it was first put towards full council,

I think the idea of whether it was an actual youth council or a forum,

it was irrelevant really, it was just if we have some way to sort of tap into the younger voices

in our district, then that would be great.

I guess my question is where do we go now?

Because there's still questions that I would have,

how do we promote this forum?

How do people apply to be on it?

How do people get appointed to it?

And who sort of frames the discussions

of the half days that are gonna happen and all of that?

So if anyone wanted to say anything about where we go next.

Jo, do you want to come in?

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:48:33

Thank you. Yes, so we've had lots of conversations with the school.

In fact, we've kind of co -created this model with them.

The agreement with the schools are that they will bring a certain number of pupils

from years nine to 12, predominantly.

We're also engaging with the family hub, the folks in family hub,

so that it's not just focused at people in education.

and early indications are that the majority of education establishments

in the district want to engage,

and that ranges from Compass, which is a pupil exclusion unit,

and we've also invited the college,

all the secondary schools, Beacon, the Lighthouse.

So we've had positive feedback from all of them.

What we're saying to them is the larger establishments,

can they bring seven or eight young people

and for them to decide who they bring.

I know that one organisation, one school, has had a selection process

and they asked us what kind of people are we looking for

and we gave them a sense of that.

But predominantly it's those who are interested in democracy

and we've explained to them that in terms of the first forum,

we're taking the lead on the content

based on what young people told us back in the summer

that were key issues for them.

The overriding issue then was around climate change,

especially water safety.

But also feeling safe in the district was another area

that came out of our corporate plan consultation with young people.

So our key topics for the first forum

are going to be around climate change and safety in the community.

From a climate change perspective, it dovetails perfectly

with the grants that we're going to be making available

to schools and community groups of a thousand pounds

so that they then, the people that come to the forum,

can choose to apply for the grants

because one of the things that we're really excited about

is the possibility for young people to have agency

and to take action rather than just giving their voice

to be able to make change within the community.

We're also working with the police

and we'll be able to give young people the opportunity

to walk around the district with our,

initially in Folkestone, with a community safety officer

and a police officer to identify the areas where they feel unsafe so that we can put

in place plans like lighting and things like that to make them feel more safe.

In terms of the topic for the second forum, we don't know yet, so that will be influenced

by the first forum.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:51:05

Just to say, to second what Councillor Conville said, that it's

Cllr Bridget Chapman - 0:51:09

brilliant to see this coming

forward and a huge thank you to Anita and to officers and everybody that's been involved

in this. I know it's a lot of work and it's great to see it happening. My main point would

be that I want all the young people in our district to see themselves, to think about

becoming councillors in the future, to think about working for the council, to become interested

in politics and how they can influence what happens in their communities, what happens

at the local and even higher levels. And it's really important for me that the young people

involved in this have some way to continue involvement with their ideas as they go through

the system. I think as a new Councillor, I have learned and I'm still learning a lot

about how the ideas that you have and that you bring forward

might change or slow down as you bump up against legislation,

against workload, against financial constraints.

And I think it's really important that they see that, see those processes

and how you can overcome those hurdles

so that they keep feeding in as their ideas go through the system.

I don't know if there's been any thought to how that can happen,

but that would be something I'd be really keen to see happen in the process.

Thanks, come back on that.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:52:45

Thank you, that's such a good point.

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:52:50

I think what we've had agreement from the school for

is two half -day sessions in the year that they come out of the school.

In addition to that, we are putting on a workshop outside of those timeframes

to help those who are interested in a career in local government.

In terms of the future, I think there could be something really interesting

about a kind of alumni group of people who've been in the Youth Forum for a year

and then form perhaps some support for the next group.

I haven't got the ideas, but I think this sounds like a really good way forward.

we just need to think about how we do that in a resource -effective way,

because we haven't brought any additional resource into the team to do this.

We're managing it within our current workload.

So it's just finding...

I'd definitely take that forward as a concept and think about how we can do it,

and indeed talk to the young people about how they would like to do it,

because we do want to co -create with them.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Councillor Butcher.

Cllr Bridget Chapman - 0:53:51

Just to add my congratulations, it just sounds absolutely fantastic.

what's been done really great to hear,

Cllr James Butcher - 0:53:58

and what's coming back from the young people.

It was just a point on 2 .3 about member involvement

and whether that can be more widely spread

than cabinet members and group leaders and so on,

because I imagine there might be all sorts of members

who would be interested to be involved,

would have things to say, would bring a different perspective.

Councillor Jones, is that on the same point?

I just wanted to come back.

Mr Ewan Green - 0:54:22

Cllr Anita Jones - 0:54:22

We did talk a lot about who should be involved.

From my point of view, I think it's really important

that it's not the young people being overshadowed

by lots of councillors and it's their chance.

So I think that's perhaps why it was a not necessarily

huge group, you don't want the whole council watching

because it's quite intimidating for the young people perhaps.

I don't know if that's a, yeah, okay, good,

I'm getting a nod, that was quite, well we agreed.

But obviously we can have different invitations depending on which themes.

I think that's where we were going with that, weren't we?

Do you want to add anything to that?

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:55:03

Yeah, depending on the theme we were going to involve the relevant people.

And I think certainly in one group,

the group leader has asked if one of their team,

I don't know exactly the words,

one of their group could come to the meeting instead of them.

So perhaps councillors could switch in for each other

so that they'd get more exposure.

The point is that we don't want a room full of councillors

or too many councillors overshadowing the people.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:55:35

OK, thanks. I think it would also be good to have

different councillors taking part,

so there's that range of representation.

Maybe a bit more thought could be given around that.

The other thing I just wanted to ask was around what happens after 2025.

I think the session's planned, but is there an intention then for it to continue?

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:55:58

Yes, so this is obviously planned as the pilot year.

We were fully expecting to keep going.

With the unitary situation, we'll have to review how that works.

We know FANUC do a similar kind of youth forum as well,

but other councils not so much.

So we will have a look at how we dovetail with others as it goes forward.

But our intention is to continue, whilst we're still a council,

to continue with our forum.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:56:28

It would be a good thing for us to be flagging up and showcasing, if you like,

going into the discussions about reorganisation,

as something that it would be good for tree authorities to take up as a project.

Any other comments on this one, Councillor Wing?

Cllr John Wing - 0:56:46

Thank you chair. It's great what my colleagues were saying earlier about what we could do.

I think planning being another good idea perhaps getting involved with, as Councillor Marchant

was saying earlier, it's their future, it's their town, so perhaps planning is something

also. And yes I totally agree about the future and unitary. It would be fantastic if we could

set this up so in two years time we could say look we've got this fantastic scheme here

and then the entry, whatever they look like, will then take it forward.

That would be really good. Well done for all the work you've done. Very impressive.

Thanks, Councillor Wing.

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:57:22

OK, if there's no more comments, we've got two recommendations in front of us.

Obviously, we've made some comments through the course of the discussion,

which hopefully have been picked up as part of the feedback

going into the next stages of things.

So unless anybody wants to kind of suggest

amending the recommendations or adding

anything to the recommendations,

then we'll take them as they are.

And with those comments that

people have made noted, OK,

so to receive a note,

the report and to agree to recommend

to the Council that youth forums.

The district is created as

detailed in this report.

I can have a proposer,

Council McConville and a seconder,

Councilor Martin Allen and all

those in favor agreed.

That's great. Thank you very much.

That's great. Thanks. Thanks, Joe.

Thanks, Councillor McConville.

OK, we're moving on to item seven,

which is Otterpool Park strategic direction

funding and delivery 2025 -26.

7 Otterpool Park: Strategic Direction, Funding & Delivery FY 25/26

And we've got colleagues who are with us

to introduce this item. Are you going to lead off?

Yes, that's great. Thanks.

Thank you, Chair.

Microphone B - 0:58:44

I think it's important when we're asking you to approve the next 12 months,

that we look back on the previous 18 months

and the work we've done and the reasons why.

If you cast your mind back to the OSE Cabinet Report,

the key points were to seek a JV partner

and to seek external funding.

To do that, we needed to underpin the financial model

and understand it really well. As Jim alluded to earlier,

At that point in time, Homes England and Crown Estates were not interested.

So my job when I first came here back in the end of 2023 was to really understand that

financial model and to do that understand why Homes England and the Crown weren't interested.

So we employed disables at that time to get a more strategic approach on the model, to

look at the baseline and it threw up a bunch of inaccuracies that we needed to attend to

and that kind of formulated what we needed to do over the next sort of 18 months which

to really understand the model in more detail.

To give you some headlines as to what was wrong with the model, if that's okay, Chair,

we had underestimated 106 budget.

The 106 budget in the model wasn't singing with the heads of terms that was agreed by

the NLP at the time.

We never included the WIP, so there was £70 million worth of WIP that wasn't included

in that model.

Work in progress, sorry, work in progress.

Day one payments for the land as contracts to the options were actually spread out in

previous model, so they were kinder on the model than they should have been.

So all of this stuff led to what was a 200 million pound surplus becoming a negative

point, so we were in deficit.

So that really leads me on to what we've been doing over the course of the last 18 months.

So the engagement of Savills was pretty key, okay.

They were engaged through the financial modelling.

David Locke Associates for planning the 106 and WSP for value engineering and their job

there was to rationalise the baseline model and then offer us up levers and scenarios

so we could bring the model back into a surplus which they're on with doing.

Improve the land options, we've done so already through Cabinet which are better payment structures

for the local authority.

We've got another free to do now.

Initial discussions with KCC are underway in helping bring down the 106 although that

is quite a tough task actually.

Soft market testing, residential and commercial interest, we've gone out to the market and

we know what the land's worth, we know what the commercial area's worth now and the

NLP is playing a major role in negotiations with this collaboration agreement that we're

about to sign.

On top of that, the wetlands and the wastewater treatment have been procured in terms of design

and we're looking to put an application into KCC as a standalone application within

the next couple of weeks.

Our site wide utilities procurement is critical to the scheme because we've designed the

whole site in terms of electricity and we've secured 1500 units of electricity and 1500

units of water which actually adds value to the scheme and gives any developer coming

in here to secure it in peace of mind that they can step on site on day one and actually

work rather than have to try and get the utilities in.

We've reduced the Ottawa Park LOP's overhead and we've completely placed one on network

rail.

The strategic land agreement with Folkestone and the High F is almost complete and that

takes care of the site wide asset management, health and safety, welfare, ecology and maintenance

of the scheme.

So that's an agreement between Folkestone and the LLP that will be put in place.

We've improved the governance on the scheme which I know the Chair is going to speak to

in a moment and we've worked closely with, I've personally worked closely with Andy

Braskovich on the solar provision that's potentially going to cabinet on the 10th of

February.

We've done all of that within the 9 .95 million pound budget that was set at the beginning

of the 18 months.

I think, you know, the achievements with, what's the out turn of that is we've got

a baseline model now that we understand, okay, that is market facing.

So you know, instead of having a very complicated understanding, not being able to understand

the model, we've got one that actually looks to the market.

So what would the developer look for in a model?

We have got a strong coach for funding with a site wide utility provision and waste water

treatment plant, including the land that it sits on.

And we've got a much firmer grass now on controlling our overheads, because we've

got a much smaller team.

And we're only working now on stuff that's a necessity and adds value.

I was going to do a homesick and luck play, but I think, Jim, you've already given a

pretty broad brush on where we are.

Excuse me, whatever.

So the transition budget for…do you want me to stop for questions, the talk chair,

on that part?

No, no, I think if you're going to introduce the budget, yeah, part of it would be helpful.

Thanks.

The budget for 2025 and 26 is much of the same in terms of the moderning, but it's with

Homes England as a collaboration.

The LLP's focus now is getting the Treasury asking the next six months.

Sorry, it's important, folks on the High Financial Council, getting the Treasury asking the next

six months.

The continuation of consultancy agreements with Savills, DLA and WSP, the Stansept will

carry on, but they will be 50 % contributed by Homes England, so that will feed back into

the model.

We'll continue working on phasing and modeling as you'd expect to find out the best scenarios

that leave us to make it more viable for a joint venture partner.

We'll continue with the 106 negotiations with Kent County Council, which will be ongoing,

I'm sure, and we will secure planning for the wastewater treatment plant and sick funding

off Homes England.

We'll also renegotiate the land options for the final three landowners.

We'll also continue to secure any future utility provision where possible and if value

who's added and there's a stuff on the land management

with the SLA, the service land agreement,

for looking after the reservoir for continuing

with maintenance and working closely with FHDC

on all of the asset, which is part of the role

of the site manager that works down there.

So all of that stuff will continue on

and I think, to be honest, I think we get to a point

where within six to eight months we should be in a position

where homes are gonna be put that treasury request in

and the LLP will play a major role in doing that.

I suppose you can see we've got a much reduced forecast of 4 .2 million,

which is from 9 .95 at the previous budget, because of our overhead.

The main focus is the collaboration.

That's it from me. I'm happy to take questions.

Thanks. Did anyone else want to speak?

No, not at the moment.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:05:01

Microphone D - 1:05:03

Thank you chair. Great to meet you all across the room. I suppose just to add to Gary's

overview, I joined as chair in July last year following an independent appointment process.

I'm not sure how many applicants you have but it was definitely a robust process. I

have more people in that interview than I've ever had in any interview in my life and I'm

I'm sure some of you will be aware that I'm a local resident

and so this is very important to me personally

to make sure that we, through the work that Gary

and the team are doing, make sure that we get to a point

where we've got a development that is a deliverable

so that we can deliver all the benefits and outcomes

that are set out in the charter.

We obviously have two members of the council on the board

and we've been working very closely as a board together

to make sure that the objectives that we're looking

to achieve through the transition programme and the agreed budget are achieved.

I suppose just to add, when I joined I was shared the governance review from the local

partnerships had provided and what's been really nice I think since starting is just

seeing how close that collaboration is between council officers and the LLP team but also

and I and Susan and Gary catch up quite regularly just to make sure that actually we are aligned

that the direction of travel is clear and I think everyone now is focused on these discussions

with Homes England and in turn with government around how we can secure the necessary funding

to get this development away as quickly as possible because we want to really maximise

the momentum that's built up so far and build on the work that's been done today.

But happy to answer any questions.

Thanks.

Microphone B - 1:06:59

I'd just like to add to the modelling work that's been done as well.

I was going to say that the key stuff that Savills, WSP and DLA have highlighted and

indeed adapted, has caused us to move back into a surplus now.

So we are working on the right stuff but it still needs public intervention.

No matter what we do, we still need more help.

and also Holmes England are obviously the way to do that,

so I just wanted to make that clear.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:07:23

Okay, thanks.

Councillor Martin.

Cllr Jim Martin - 1:07:26

Sorry, Chair, just in case you hadn't heard enough from me.

In terms of just going back to devolution,

the Otter Brook Park has a monster implication

in terms of devolution discussions.

We're right on the border with Ashford.

It is of such significance to Kent that it is, KCC are super interested in Otterball.

For us, this council have invested a huge amount of money into Otterball and we need

to see that money come back and it needs to come back to Folkestone and Hyde and not necessarily

regenerating planet. So this is something that is going to add a complication to our

evolution discussions. So the committee know, I wrote to Matthew

Pennycook, the Minister for Housing last week, I'm asking for his advice.

Are we to carry on with Homes England?

Are they our avenue or do we pin all of our hopes

on the new home, new towns task force

which has been created?

Do we bid directly to MHCLG

or do we wait for the installation of the mayor

and wait for Otterball to be picked up

within a mayoral strategic function.

So, you know, there's a load of ways that we could go on this.

The best one I don't yet know,

but, you know, just it fits in very, very, very importantly

within our strategic devolution discussions.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:09:29

Another letter we're waiting for a reply on, so let us know.

I'll open it up to Councillor Alan Moulton and Councillor Butcher.

Thanks very much for that.

Cllr Alan Martin - 1:09:41

My questions relate to the point that Jim's just raised, actually.

We're about to sign this joint venture agreement

and yet we've got the move to a unitary council and everything on the horizon.

I was just trying to war -game that in my mind.

So the original intention is that's a six month contract with a three month extension.

So if we sign that with it starting at the end of February,

that would be... The six months would be concluding around September time.

And I was trying to work out in my mind whether that's very good and helpful timing,

given the current time scales associated around us moving into a unitary,

or whether we need to rethink that in some way.

I also wonder, for instance, do we need that collaboration to happen quicker, so we've

got more certainty around what's going to happen?

Would we actually have entered into a discussion with Homes England around a joint venture

if we knew this was happening?

So would our decision making have been the same around our need for a joint venture if

we were part of a bigger council or if the budgets were being accessed from elsewhere?

I don't know if you can elaborate on that.

Thank you, Chair.

Cllr Jim Martin - 1:11:01

The main reason for me writing for advice,

it was the best way to protect our momentum

from everything that Gary has said.

We've built up a head of steam here.

We're making progress.

And we want to protect that momentum,

because if, say for example, we just leave it for the new unitary

or we just leave it for the Mayor to pick up under a strategic function,

the Government will lose, you know, arguably 10 ,000 homes.

There might be a two, if not a three -year drift

in terms of the project timetable.

Now, absolutely nobody wants that, you know, certainly not central Government.

So that was the reason why I wrote.

We are about to sign a collaboration agreement,

not a joint venture arrangement,

but it's a collaboration agreement

that is intended to move us towards a joint venture,

a joint venture with Homes England.

Homes England are a 10 % owner of the site.

They own 10 % of the site outright.

They are the obvious partner.

And, you know, the thinking around central government,

local government partnerships really can move quite a lot.

Our alternative would be that after six months,

if we can't come to an agreement on a joint venture,

then we have to go out to the market and, you know,

we will be talking to house builders, etc.

So Gary's work is super important in terms of not only crunching the numbers day to day

to see what works, what doesn't work, but also to prepare this model so that it's market -facing.

So that in six months, if we still haven't agreed a joint venture with Homes England

Or, God forbid, Homes England might be being wound up

as a government agency,

and we may be awaiting the arrival of the New Towns Taskforce.

So it's just another level of uncertainty,

but what we can do is make that model market -facing.

And whoever we do that joint venture deal with,

we will need that, and it will need to be viable

and demonstrate viability. Without viability we don't do diddly.

No one's going to be remotely interested in this.

So I can't answer the specific...

We would hope that our direction is travel, is that we will enter a joint venture with

Homes England, but we...

And that's what the collaboration agreement will say, is that it's the intention of the

parties to work towards that, and we're giving ourselves six months to do it.

The timetable that we now have, we've got to really get this done in 2025.

If we enter a joint venture with Homes England and say for example the Newtown's task force

become the chosen vehicle for the government's housing delivery,

that would be on their side, they'll simply transfer one in and one out.

There shouldn't be a problem.

The key for us is to get a joint venture agreement.

I don't know if that answers.

I'll give you more questions.

Come back.

Cllr Alan Martin - 1:14:52

And I completely agree with this point around momentum,

because if we are going to make sure that the value from the project comes back to the residents,

we need to make sure that we've got to a firm conclusion.

To that point, one of the concerns that we raised in the subcommittee around the collaboration

agreement was the three -month extension.

I think there's a general concern that six months was already a long time, and I think

we were quite nervous around having the three -month extension there without some really strong

triggers because there's a concern that everyone's busy and these things slide on,

whereas in the current situation we can't really allow ourselves

to get into that three months.

I don't know where we are on the wording of that currently.

I can answer that specifically, Councillor Martin.

Cllr Jim Martin - 1:15:41

So the six months essentially is to get an agreement.

We spit on our hands, we slap each other on the back and say,

we've done it, terrific.

The additional three months, and I will only agree the additional three months, to let

the lawyers do their work.

So lawyers will always take longer than you.

That is the only reason I would agree.

Just to continue on and roll on.

What we've run out of now is road.

We will be abolished in May 2027.

So our days are numbered and we've got to get this done.

So six months is absolutely nailed on as far as I'm concerned.

I'm happy to discuss with colleagues.

But the only reason I would think about a three -month extension

is for the lawyers to write it up.

It's taken them flipping months to get the collaboration agreement agreed.

So the joint venture is going to take some time,

but that would be the only reason.

Yeah.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:16:47

Microphone B - 1:16:49

Within the collaboration agreement, documents that set out the progress,

monthly progress and how we measure performance against that six months

is pretty stringent and the meetings that cover the progress weekly

is pretty stringent as well.

It will be monitored on a monthly basis

which should keep us to the six month agreement.

Do you want to come back, Councillor Martin?

Yeah, just...

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:17:11

So on the move to unitary,

Cllr Alan Martin - 1:17:15

I've got it in my mind at the back end of this year,

we've reached a point where we can't make executive decisions,

and I can't quite remember, but do we have a date for that?

Do you want to...?

Well, OK.

Cllr Jim Martin - 1:17:30

So there is no specific date at the moment,

but the central government are alert to the fact that a lot of district councils like

us might be seeking to divest ourselves of assets to trusted partners, FOCES and town

council for example, high town council, etc. etc.

So they will be bringing in secondary legislation in, as we understand, 2026, that will limit

our powers to engage in some kind of fire sale or something that they're worried about.

I mean that's not on our horizon as it were, but that will be a limiting factor.

But by the time we get to 2026, central government will have sorted themselves out a little bit.

They are kind of making it up as they go along, but we will get a lot more clarity

by then and I'm firmly convinced that we will know the route then.

So, what you say is absolutely right.

It is the end of 2026 is the date

that we think our powers may be limited from then.

So, that's where we are.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:18:54

Maybe just in terms of the committee and through the sub -group's ability

to continue to scrutinise and monitor what's happening

with the collaboration agreement.

I don't think we have got a date for another meeting of that subgroup.

Maybe it would be sensible to look at that

and what the appropriate timing would be around that

to be able to spend a bit more time on some of these things.

Sorry about this.

Cllr Jim Martin - 1:19:18

I don't think I've ever had the opportunity to thank the Task and Finish Group

for their contribution that they made, which was significant, believe me.

And so I'm very grateful to overview this group,

and very grateful to the Tusk and Swedish group

because their contribution was significant.

Thanks, and hopefully not over yet.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:19:39

And I know there have been comments,

sort of feedback after the last session that we had,

which I collated and shared afterwards around the wording

and exactly some of the concerns that you'd raised, Councillor Martin.

So that's good.

We've got very diligent members of the committee looking at this,

which is really helpful.

Okay, shall we return to thinking about the budget?

Are there questions that people have got on that?

Councillor Butcher.

Yes, sort of quite a high level question really.

Cllr James Butcher - 1:20:09

We sort of talked about the investment that people are

folks are made or the deal for the people are folks.

And I have a very hazy idea of what that deal is,

as I imagine most residents do in terms of just kind of

what's the level of the loan, what's the level of interest

that would have been paid by the time the loan's paid off,

when will that be?

just those broad brush things which I think if you read all these papers you can start

to sort of piece it together.

But it feels like it would be really helpful just to have in one place this is the broad

outline of what we will have spent, when will that get paid off, what will the profit be

overall to reassure people that actually this is a really wise investment because there

are a bunch of stories where councils have gone awry through these kind of investments.

You can add flavour to what I'm about to say.

Cllr Jim Martin - 1:20:53

You're absolutely right, Councillor Butcher.

And this is why there's been such a huge emphasis on the modelling, because it's the modelling

that will tell you all of this.

So we could take a snapshot on the model now and answer those questions, but we anticipate

that the further work that will be done on the model will tighten those answers up.

So, you know, I know you may be asking, well, why is he always on about this model?

Well, that's the reason, is because it calculates everything and will answer a lot more questions than the ones you list.

But that is why it's so critically important. Sorry, Gary.

Microphone B - 1:21:44

So Councillor Bocci, the work in progress which you're talking about which is the £79

million which covers land, planning and on -cost for Otterball Park, the NLP, will form part

of the model like Jim says and it can be treated in a number of ways. It's just that we haven't

actually got to that point yet, certainly not with HomeZoom and we haven't got it, certainly

not with a joint venture partner. But that's probably a question for the 151 which unfortunately

isn't here today.

So I get a bit about working out the model, I guess people might be surprised that there

Cllr James Butcher - 1:22:18

isn't a kind of a set of figures at the moment pending models just to be able to answer that,

just those very broad -rushed questions really about, anyway, when might we get that model?

The model work, well it's part of the collaboration agreement so it could be up to six months,

Microphone B - 1:22:39

before it's completely ready for a treasury request.

How the WIP, the work in progress,

is treated within that model could be discussed

within the next couple of three months.

So I'd just like to give you a date and then fail that date.

So I suppose one of the questions that would need

to be asked is the interest payments for that,

because at the moment we've got a work in progress figure,

which I'm assuming doesn't include the interest payments

at the moment as it rolled up interest.

So it doesn't include the interest payments,

so we would need a one five one to answer that.

Sorry, that answers some of your question.

Well, I suppose I go back to it.

It feels kind of weird that we're kind of this far into something without just being

Cllr James Butcher - 1:23:15

able to give people a broad brush sense of what this deal looks like.

Sorry, Chair.

Cllr Jim Martin - 1:23:23

Well, so, I mean, in terms of broad brush, the £79 million that we've spent thus far,

a £44 million of that was on land purchase.

So, and things like our peak debt, this is against our 119 million pound facility.

So we have a facility to draw down 119 million pounds, we're 79 million pound into that.

The key things that the model will demonstrate,

and the model varies day to day,

believe me, it sort of takes on a life of its own,

but the key things that the model will demonstrate

will vary hugely in terms of the inputs.

So, for example, you've heard me go on and on about the wastewater treatment plant.

A waste water treatment plant, including land, costs, etc.,

is £26 million.

If, say, for example,

just for example, Homes England decided to fund that,

then the model changes completely for us.

Our breakeven point comes forward, our overall profit increases.

That's because we never get the money back

for the wastewater treatment plant.

Every house that gets sold, there's money that comes back to us,

but a wastewater treatment plant is something that has to be provided.

It's infrastructure, so we never get the money back.

It's a great big huge lump at the beginning of the model.

So it takes the model into a deep dive of debt.

So that is why Gary said earlier that we need public support,

and that's part of the reason.

You could say, to a lesser extent, roads, the drains,

the general infrastructure, they all had those kind of impacts on the model.

But that's why the model is such a live thing.

What you would say, I'm sure, is, well, 75, 79 million into 119 million,

we're running out of road from that perspective as well,

and we are.

So, we are time limited all around on Otipol.

We have to get a deal and...

That's it.

Thanks, Jim.

We've got £79 million of borrowing,

Cllr James Butcher - 1:26:06

so there must be then we can calculate the interest payments on that

and just broadly how long we're expecting.

I think what just tends to happen is we get kind of,

in terms of our communication explanation things right into the detail of stuff

and you talked about getting public support, it's very hard to get public support

for what exactly, for what deal is it?

So, yeah, it would just be really helpful if we can get to the point

where we just have a bit more clarity about what the deal is that we signed up to on the whole.

Not that sort of the fine detail but just those broad brush is £79 million a borrowing,

it's this amount of interest we're probably expecting that to be to be paying that for this many years so therefore

Total bill for interest we're expecting to be about this

But we're expecting to get just that will be great at some point to be able to explain it. Yeah

We are yet far away the current model takes the whip out the work in

Cllr Jim Martin - 1:26:57

Microphone B - 1:26:57

progress out on day one of an acquisition

So if you're if we go into a joint venture with home zoom and labour and partnering

Folks love to get paid back the whip on that

That's the current model.

But in order to make the model better, to make it more market facing,

it may need to be treated in a different way.

So the answer to the question really is,

we're not going to know until we do a joint venture deal

when that money's coming out.

And if it does come out, when it's coming out,

through that joint venture partnership,

because it may be treated in a different way through the process.

I'm sure that doesn't answer your question,

but we won't know before the collaboration agreement is up,

that's for certain, when that date is of that money coming back.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:27:35

I suppose it's where does that ongoing scrutiny and ability to ask questions and see where

the different stages are at sits.

This would probably be helpful, wouldn't it, Councillor Butcher, in terms of being able

to address the point that you're making.

So I don't know if you want to comment on that question, Martin.

Cllr Jim Martin - 1:27:51

If it's helpful, Chair, we could agree with yourself, sort of snapshot headlines.

So, you know, the work in progress, for example, on a specific date, we could take that number

from the model and put it into a table for the committee members.

But it's only a snapshot.

But it would only ever be a snapshot.

There's nothing fixed about it.

I don't know whether that would be helpful.

but we could put some numbers together.

It would certainly give people an idea if that's helpful.

I think Councillor Butcher is nodding.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:28:35

I mean, the fact that we're pursuing this

Cllr James Butcher - 1:28:39

must mean we think this is going to have a good return,

otherwise we wouldn't be doing this.

So therefore there is some thinking about this is the kind of return

we're expecting, otherwise we wouldn't be doing it.

And I guess it's just doing that.

Paula.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:28:52

Yeah, thanks. I mean, I've got a lot of sympathy with your questions.

Microphone D - 1:28:57

I mean, development and talking about financial models is quite a complex thing.

Gary and Savills and the team have got their head in the detail around the numbers.

And I think, I suppose, just sort of helicoptering up a bit, what the team are trying to do is to say, okay, there's a certain amount of money that's been spent thus far.

the costs associated with delivering the infrastructure and the housing are this much the likely return,

depending on various different scenarios for when land might be sold or housing comes forward is X.

And there's various different permutations as to what that means.

Where I think we're at is in a position where it's pretty clear that to fund some of that strategic

site -wide infrastructure that Jim talked about and Gary talked about, so for example the

wastewater treatment plant, it's very difficult and this is totally common with all developments

of this size and scale, is that that sort of money doesn't grow on trees, right? You're

talking about tens of millions of pounds for this type of infrastructure and all developments

of this scale struggle to be able to fund that upfront. In this case, we also have land

payments that Gary alluded to that need to be paid according to the existing agreements

really early on in the process. So what the team are trying to do is to figure out a way

in which some of those payments might be shifted a bit in order to be able to reduce that financial

burden up front, as well as trying to understand what is the scale of, if you like, public

supports of government financial support that might be needed in order to be able to fund

that upfront strategic site -wide infrastructure.

And so the conversations with Homes England

are all about actually trying to really button down

what is that ask of government, and on what basis

and what assumptions sit behind that.

And certainly from my perspective,

I think it's really important that we have a really clear

story around that, because if we can't communicate that

within this room then we're certainly not going to convince government to be

able to invest and give us the money. So that's I think just to sort of reassure

you that the absolute focus now is on really narrowing down the specifics and

say okay right what are the options and what is it that we need to be able to

get to get this away and I think the point at which some of that's refined

over the next few weeks and months then it will be really useful to have the

and just say, actually, this is where we're at,

this is what we're asking for,

and see if that makes sense to everybody.

I think it's just, as Jim said,

picking out those headlines and making it really simple

to kind of understand.

So, I don't know why we can't commit to coming back.

I think that session would be really helpful.

Susan?

Dr Susan Priest - 1:32:02

Well, I think you got to the right place,

which is absolutely, scrutiny needs to continue.

Under the current environment, it would be appropriate to come back to this committee,

but it would have to be a confidential item because of the nature of some of the figures.

You could elevate principles out of that for more public consumption,

but in terms of where we are, it will take a few months just to manage timelines for you.

If, of course, we don't have over -inscrutiny, well, we still have the owner's committee,

and of course we are potentially moving to the shareholders subcommittee anyway.

So that would be the equivalent, where the scrutiny within the committee structure

that we have designed but not yet moved to.

So there will be opportunities for that.

I think it's really a really valid point, but I would just urge very strongly,

as I'm sure the monitoring officer will as well, that there are only certain things

that we would allow to be covered in public session, purely because of the nature

of where we are with the negotiations and figures

into living with the project,

but it's entirely right that you feel satisfied

and have the opportunity to do so.

Okay, thank you.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:33:10

Shall we look at this budget in front of us then

in terms of... I think that's been a really helpful discussion,

but do people have any questions about the specific item in front of us?

Councillor Butcher?

I was just looking at 3 .2, if that's what we mean, the transition budget.

Cllr James Butcher - 1:33:29

And just so, got there the biggest item is the JV procurement of land options and I know

we've got some sort of detail behind that.

I suppose the question is how are we supposed to tell whether that's a reasonable figure

and whether it's only for money?

Because I've got no idea but clearly we're being called upon to scrutinise this so how

do we know whether that's...

Of course, so the land option portion of it is already fixed through the hazard terms

that have gone through cabinet and been approved.

So that's part of that figure isn't it Kerry?

The rest of it is based on fee proposals that we've had from Savills,

Microphone B - 1:33:59

DLA, WSP and ongoing fee proposals for the next six months collaboration agreement.

And there's a budget in there. Sorry, do you want to jump in Kerry on that?

It might be still in Kerry's funder here, but all of the fees are not just finger in the air fees.

We've actually gone out to the market and we've actually tested it with Savills, tested it with WSP and tested it with DLA.

So there is some science behind those figures.

Microphone A - 1:34:28

That particular section, the budget is split into three portions.

As Gary's already said, one part is for the options agreements,

which has already been set in stone for us,

and we're looking at what we can move.

Another portion we've got free proposals for from our major consultants.

And the last portion is to go ahead with the procurement

if we need to in the latter six months of next year.

This year.

So I guess because we've got a scrutiny hat on,

Cllr James Butcher - 1:34:53

and what we're supposed to be doing is ask some questions

that satisfy ourselves on behalf of residents,

so that all makes sense,

and that someone else wouldn't come along and go,

that is insane, why on earth are you spending out of that budget

one half million, nobody does that,

people spend half that, I've no idea.

So how do we satisfy ourselves

that all that work that you've done is as it should be and valid?

Microphone B - 1:35:22

There's a framework with the local authority that employs the like, with Savills and DLA

are employed on, we've got a waiver for the NLP board to employ them on that framework.

Those frameworks have set rates for our all consultants, so we know we're paying market

rates for a lot of these, this is for the ones that are currently working on the model.

we would naturally market test or go for a procurement process through the board come,

I think it's first of March when these consultants actually appointments run out.

If we feel that they're very competitive then we would just go on instruction

under their current appointment.

So I hope that gives you a bit of confidence that they are operating within market rates.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:36:04

Okay, thank you. Any other questions?

Question 3.

Cllr John Wing - 1:36:15

...and placemaking. I know it's one of the smallest ones.

You mentioned in there about public consultation.

I think this is very important because we need to be in the public on board.

Speaking personally as a board member from one of the areas,

at the moment I think there's an idea that this isn't going to happen

because I haven't heard anything.

We sometimes think we don't hear anything, but don't push it.

It will just drift away.

But it's not going to, we know it's not going to.

I mean this government seems hell bent on building houses as we all know.

We've watched the news at the evening light.

I mean and not only for the public, also I hear the landowners, the farmers aren't particularly...

they would like to know more as well because they're not sure whether they should see their field

or because they're not going to be ploughed up next year.

I mean I think that's very important being this forward.

I know I'll wait for Homes England and quite rightly so until we know what's happening

with waste water treatment plants.

I mean we must get the public news out there because the public do need to know.

And another small point,

Councillor Martin mentioned the wastewater treatment plant has gone to KCC for pain, is that correct?

So they won't come into this chamber again.

What's that?

I'll tell you that, right?

So just on the updating the local residents,

Microphone B - 1:37:28

obviously the wastewater treatment was a standard application to KCC

and we did a public consultation for that, it was really well received.

And the landowners affected by that area were updated with plenty of time.

In terms of the general ongoing work at Orkall and how do we update people around the area,

we have the fire parishes, sounds like Lord of the Rings film, but the fire parishes have...

So we have a meeting once a month with fire parishes where the NLP does give a general update.

but you're quite right, we can update land owners probably a bit more.

I think we want to get through this first point with Homes England

just to get the collaboration room signed up

so we've got a bit of security in what we're telling them is going to happen

and I think then we can start progressing with that.

In terms of the wastewater treatment application,

we want it with KCC

because otherwise it's got to be linked to a 106 agreement.

So we want to advance the wastewater treatment plant

and the only way to do that is to take it separate from the out -of -long -descent

sort of resolution of the grant

because we're not going to sign a 106 any time soon

but we want to get on with the wastewater treatment so we can start that work straightaway,

or more or less straightaway, with Homes England money.

If we have to wait for a partner to come in to sign the 106, it's a longer process.

So that's the theory behind it.

And actually it's KCC or Foresty on wastewater anyway,

so you'd think that they would be the plan of Foresty.

Mr Ewan Green - 1:38:54

Thank you. Just to add to that, excuse me,

Our planning committee will be asked to receive a report as a consultee to the planning application

of the county council, so our LPA will make a recommendation for our committee to put

views into the public consultation as a consultee, so it will come into our council and the LPA

for some level of scrutiny.

Okay, thanks for clarifying.

Do you want to come back to what John offered?

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:39:22

So we're more or less changing positions, where KCC might be consulting on a planning

Cllr John Wing - 1:39:27

an issue moving the other way round,

we've become a consultee into the playing application, if I might know.

Yes.

Mr Ewan Green - 1:39:38

OK.

Councillor Martin.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:39:42

I had some similar questions to John around communication.

When you were answering that,

Cllr Alan Martin - 1:39:46

when you say you have monthly meetings with the parishes,

do you mean the parish councils?

The parish councils, we'll take the meeting with the parishes.

This is a long -standing meeting

Cllr Jim Martin - 1:39:57

and the parish council send representatives

to the five parishes' meetings.

And sometimes they're chairs, sometimes the clerks,

sometimes just council members

and then they convey the information back to them.

I have been making... I went to Stanford Parish Council recently

because they need to be updated.

At least as far as the parish councils are concerned,

not necessarily the general population,

we've been pretty good at keeping them up to date

with exactly where we are.

Thank you. I guess that's leading into my point

Cllr Alan Martin - 1:40:45

in that us keeping the parish councils updated

It doesn't necessarily keep people in those parishes up to date.

Often these parishes don't have very good communication or connection with their local

residents so if we're relying on that, that probably isn't enough.

I get your point actually and I think we've made a case with the wastewater treatment

Microphone B - 1:41:08

that we can get the information out there ahead of the plan applications.

I think we just need to...

We did do a lot of round -of -plan applications

for Tier 2 stuff on Phase 1,

and indeed the resolution had gone clearly.

So we could do update meetings more locally,

I think might be something that we could look into.

Okay, thanks. Good points.

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:41:30

My question in relation to the budget is about...

There'd been previously quite a programme of events on the site,

educational opportunities, using what's happening to kind of involve colleges or schools,

if there was kind of festival that took place, you know, all things that have been, you know,

around engaging people more generally.

Is there any space for that kind of activity in the budget?

And I saw the note about Western Hanger Castle now being under the responsibility of the

district council in terms of maintenance and management.

So this might not be a question for yourselves, but would there be the flexibility to do things

using the castle under a different budget heading for example?

Microphone B - 1:42:24

If I can answer the first part, no there's nothing in the budget for, the education stuff

is fairly cheap and reasonable.

We've had primary school over more recently, important to the guys, but we've had a primary

I saw a call over recently before Christmas which went well and that was just an update on construction and stuff like that

even though there's no construction going on at the moment but we haven't got anything on for things like zest fests and stuff like that

we just haven't got the budget for it and we need to restrict what we're doing ahead of the collaboration of Everyone Homes England

Sorry, did you want to jump? Sorry

Sorry, there is some communication I know another member of the team is speaking to the local colleges

It's more Peter, but it's still continuing.

It's not really stuff that we're budgeting for.

It's stuff that we are doing for John, our development manager.

Okay, that's good to hear.

Sorry, Chair. Just to add to that,

Cllr Jim Martin - 1:43:19

you'll recall that we carried out three reviews,

governance, management and finance.

You know, I took everything out.

I had to try and make it as viable as possible.

Now John has been doing a fantastic job because when I went into Folkestone College recently,

all I got was, you know, what a great job, you know, and they're very focused.

They would love to do more.

Folkestone College got a big construction section.

They would love to do more at Otable and we're really keen to do it.

but we've got nothing to show them.

Once we start building something,

they will be an inherent partner of what we do.

As things ease up a little bit,

loosen up a bit,

then I'm sure a lot more of these events can come back.

But initially my focus was to make the model...

Sorry, go on about the model again.

but to make it as viable as... But viability was the big issue.

It was unviable.

And that was... So that's where it all went.

It isn't that we're against any of that stuff.

It was just about crunching the numbers.

I think quite a lot of our conversation has been about how you engage people

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:44:44

and get people involved, and there's certainly ways to do that.

And also quite a lot of our conversation has been about how we engage young people.

So all of those educational skills opportunities

are really important in that respect, aren't they?

And with the wastewater treatment plant,

if that's going to be kind of coming sooner,

maybe there'll be opportunities around that

that could be looked at.

Okay, any other final comments from people on this one?

If not, then we have the recommendations in front of us.

We need to receive and note the report.

We've considered the presentation

and we can send feedback to inform the report to cabinet.

So is everybody happy to fulfill our obligations in relation to those two recommendations?

Everyone agreed?

Agreed?

Okay, thank you very much.

I think that concludes our meeting for this evening.

Thank you.

Thanks.

We welcome your comments

Required field

Name

Comments

Need an accessible hCaptcha?
Check available options.
Sign up to hCaptcha or Log in to hChaptcha.

By clicking Send feedback, you agree that Folkestone & Hythe District Council and Public-i can use the information above to review your feedback and contact you about it. See our Privacy Policy for more details.

Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Tuesday 28 January 2025, 6:00pm - Folkestone & Hythe webcasting

Overview and Scrutiny CommitteeTuesday, 28th January 2025 at 6:00pm

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Twitter

Forums

Speakers

Feedback

Votes

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:00:07

Mr Jake Hamilton - 0:00:45

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:00:51

Cllr Connor McConville - 0:00:59

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:01:06

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:01:08

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:02:03

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:02:29

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:02:36

1 Apologies for Absence

2 Declarations of Interest

3 Minutes

4 Minutes of the Finance and Performance Sub-Committee

5 Cabinet Member update

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:05:21

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:05:22

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:05:27

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:12:38

Cllr John Wing - 0:13:22

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:13:45

Cllr James Butcher - 0:13:48

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:14:42

Cllr James Butcher - 0:16:57

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:17:37

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:18:34

Cllr Bridget Chapman - 0:18:41

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:20:23

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:22:38

Mr Ewan Green - 0:22:43

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:23:05

Cllr Alan Martin - 0:23:15

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:24:04

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:26:05

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:26:28

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:34:42

Cllr James Butcher - 0:35:12

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:35:36

Dr Susan Priest - 0:37:40

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:38:17

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:38:25

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:43:39

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:43:51

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:43:54

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:44:09

6 Creation Of Folkestone & Hythe Youth Forum

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:45:07

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:46:35

Cllr Anita Jones - 0:46:47

Cllr Connor McConville - 0:47:37

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:48:33

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:51:05

Cllr Bridget Chapman - 0:51:09

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:52:45

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:52:50

Cllr Bridget Chapman - 0:53:51

Cllr James Butcher - 0:53:58

Mr Ewan Green - 0:54:22

Cllr Anita Jones - 0:54:22

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:55:03

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:55:35

Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:55:58

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:56:28

Cllr John Wing - 0:56:46

Cllr Laura Davison - 0:57:22

7 Otterpool Park: Strategic Direction, Funding & Delivery FY 25/26

Microphone B - 0:58:44

Cllr Laura Davison - 1:05:01

Microphone D - 1:05:03

Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Tuesday, 28th January 2025 at 6:00pm