Council - Wednesday 26 February 2025, 7:00pm - Folkestone & Hythe webcasting

Council
Wednesday, 26th February 2025 at 7:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 

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.

Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Anita Jones
  2. Cllr Anita Jones
  3. Dr Susan Priest
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Anita Jones
  2. Cllr James Butcher
  3. Councillor Tony Hills
  4. Cllr Adrian Lockwood
  5. Cllr Anita Jones
  6. Councillor Tony Hills
  7. Cllr Anita Jones
  8. Cllr Jackie Meade
  9. Cllr Anita Jones
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr David Godfrey
  2. Cllr Jim Martin
  3. Cllr Anita Jones
  4. Cllr David Godfrey
  5. Cllr Anita Jones
  6. Cllr David Godfrey
  7. Cllr Jim Martin
  8. Cllr Anita Jones
  9. Cllr David Godfrey
  10. Cllr Jim Martin
  11. Cllr Anita Jones
  12. Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee
  13. Cllr Anita Jones
  14. Cllr Jim Martin
  15. Cllr Anita Jones
  16. Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee
  17. Cllr Anita Jones
  18. Cllr Jim Martin
  19. Cllr Nicola Keen
  20. Cllr Nicola Keen
  21. Cllr Anita Jones
  22. Cllr Jim Martin
  23. Cllr Anita Jones
  24. Cllr Nicola Keen
  25. Cllr Anita Jones
  26. Cllr Nicola Keen
  27. Cllr Anita Jones
  28. Cllr Rebecca Shoob
  29. Cllr Anita Jones
  30. Cllr Nicola Keen
  31. Cllr Nicola Keen
  32. Cllr Rebecca Shoob
  33. Cllr Anita Jones
  34. Cllr Nicola Keen
  35. Cllr Jeremy Speakman
  36. Cllr Anita Jones
  37. Cllr Tony Cooper
  38. Cllr Anita Jones
  39. Cllr Rebecca Shoob
  40. Cllr Anita Jones
  41. Cllr Tony Cooper
  42. Cllr Anita Jones
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Jim Martin
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Anita Jones
  2. Cllr Adrian Lockwood
  3. Cllr Anita Jones
  4. Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee
  5. Cllr Anita Jones
  6. Cllr Jim Martin
  7. Cllr Anita Jones
  8. Cllr Tim Prater
  9. Cllr Jim Martin
  10. Cllr Anita Jones
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Tim Prater
  2. Cllr Anita Jones
  3. Cllr Jim Martin
  4. Cllr Anita Jones
  5. Cllr Adrian Lockwood
  6. Cllr Anita Jones
  7. Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee
  8. Cllr David Godfrey
  9. Cllr David Wimble
  10. Cllr Laura Davison
  11. Cllr Anita Jones
  12. Cllr Mike Blakemore
  13. Cllr Anita Jones
  14. Cllr Nicola Keen
  15. Cllr Anita Jones
  16. Cllr Stephen Scoffham
  17. Cllr Anita Jones
  18. Cllr Jackie Meade
  19. Cllr Anita Jones
  20. Cllr Tony Cooper
  21. Cllr Anita Jones
  22. Cllr Alan Martin
  23. Councillor Tony Hills
  24. Cllr Anita Jones
  25. Cllr Belinda Walker
  26. Cllr Anita Jones
  27. Cllr Tim Prater
  28. Cllr Anita Jones
  29. Ms Jemma West
  30. Cllr Anita Jones
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Tim Prater
  2. Cllr Anita Jones
  3. Cllr David Wimble
  4. Cllr Anita Jones
  5. Cllr Nicola Keen
  6. Cllr Anita Jones
  7. Cllr Adrian Lockwood
  8. Cllr Anita Jones
  9. Cllr Tim Prater
  10. Cllr Anita Jones
  11. Cllr Anita Jones
  12. Cllr Anita Jones
  13. Webcast Finished

Cllr Anita Jones - 0:00:13
Good evening, everyone. Before we start, I just want to share what we did this morning
in this chamber. We had all the chairs filled by young people from all over the district,
and we had our first youth forum. And it was really a positive experience for them, for
us and for officers I believe. So I think we all learned a lot about what their priorities
are and they found out a little bit about what our priorities are. So just really excited
that we managed to do that. So thank you to everybody for voting that through last week.
I don't have my Reverend Michael Dawkins with me tonight. He's on paternity leave. So we're
to just start with a moment of silence just to reflect on the agenda before us.
Thank you.
Let's all take a seat.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:01:30
So good evening and welcome to the meeting of full council.
This meeting will be webcast live to the internet.
For those who do not wish to be recorded or filmed,
you will need to leave the chamber.
For members, officers, and others speaking at the meeting,
it is 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
members that although we all have strong opinions on matters under consideration, it is important
to treat members, officers and public speakers with respect. Please note, I appreciate that
some members might not be able to stand while addressing the meeting and therefore you can
speak sitting down if you want to. Any thanks. So item one on our agenda is apologies for

1 Apologies for Absence

Dr Susan Priest - 0:02:21
absence. Thank you. Evening chair, evening councillors, colleagues and members of the
public. We have four apologies for absence this evening from councillors Chapman, Goddard,

2 Declarations of Interest

Thomas and Wing. Thank you. Thank you and do we have any declarations
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:02:42
Cllr James Butcher - 0:02:45
of interest? Councillor
Councillor Ockwood.
Councillor Tony Hills - 0:02:52
Also Director of Opportunities.
And Councillor Tony Hills.
Cllr Adrian Lockwood - 0:02:55
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:02:55
Thank you Chair.
Yes, I think we can do a KCC.
Councillor Tony Hills - 0:02:59
And Councillor Meade.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:03:02
KCC.
Cllr Jackie Meade - 0:03:04
Okay, thank you.
So moving on to item three, petitions.

3 Petitions

Cllr Anita Jones - 0:03:09
We have no petitions.

4 Questions from the Public

And item four, we have no public questions.

5 Questions from Councillors

So moving on to item 5, Councillor questions, we have seven questions from members which
are set out before you.
So our first question this evening is from Councillor Godfrey to Councillor Jim Martin.
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr David Godfrey - 0:03:35
Councillor Martin, given that the budget we'll be discussing this evening contains borrowing
proposals of 23 million pounds for a new leisure centre. Can we know the latest data play on
the Nichols Quarry site, much warranted by the leader and Councillor Peter two years
ago?
Councillor Jim Martin.
Thank you, Chair. Thank you for your question, Councillor Godfrey.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:03:58
Indeed, thank you for
your very relevant question. You are correct that the capital budget does include the potential
to invest in the new leisure facility.
And this is consistent with the ambition
that this administration has held
since taking over the leadership of the council.
I'm sure you will agree, however,
that any business case for a new leisure centre
must be underpinned by a robust strategic rationale
and stack up financially for the council.
So to that end, I have asked officers
to progress a new sport and leisure strategy.
This will assess the need for investment
in all facilities district wide,
including the opportunity that exists at Nichols Quarry,
but also in other locations.
Cabinet members are very well aware
of the need to make a decision
on the council's intentions for the Nichols Quarry site,
and the strategy will guide a decision later this year.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:05:05
Do you have a related supplementary question?
Thank you.
Cllr David Godfrey - 0:05:07
I think it's already been answered, because I was going to ask,
have there been many meaningful surveys,
cost savings done on a site which we don't seem to have yet?
And I'm told that's happening. Thank you.
Thank you. So moving on to question two,
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:05:21
from Councillor Godfrey to Councillor Jim Martin.
Cllr David Godfrey - 0:05:25
You're totally different, yes.
The Council have recently announced an agreement to SNRG to explore its smart grid technology
for Otcal Park which will include battery storage.
It has been published recently about fire safety of battery storage so I was come to
denote that he was covered about possible alternatives.
Is he referring to the development technology of liquid air storage and if so perhaps could
we ask SNRG for a briefing on this?
Councillor De Martin.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:05:55
Thank you for your excellent question.
Councillor Confrey, this is a topic that is not only highly relevant but is also ground
breaking in terms of achieving the government's vision for a net zero future and aligns strongly
with our existing policies.
As you know, the Council of Cabinet have agreed to enter into an options agreement for a city
Energy to submit a planning application for their solution to bring green, sustainable
power to Otterfield Park.
The solution of the solar park, rooftop solar and battery storage all connected with smart
grids will put the development firmly on the path to net zero in use.
The safety of the power network will be of a primary concern.
Synergy will address this through the planning application.
There will be not one large battery storage facility for the whole development but rather
a series of small communal battery storage facilities connected to each smart grid that
will serve 200 to 300 homes each.
Where Synergy use conventional electric battery storage,
energy storage, sorry, their solutions must comply
with the latest fire safety standards.
One of the benefits of having a communal battery energy
storage system for a group of homes is that it can be
designed with all of the necessary fire safety measures
and located a safe distance from homes.
The latest fire safety standards
are prescriptive on these points.
You are of course correct, Councillor Godfrey.
I did agree to consider other options
for the storage of surplus power
that may be generated at Otterpool Park.
Synergy has not integrated liquid energy storage into its smart grid to date.
But the very nature of the smart grid means that new technologies can be integrated as
they evolve and become cost competitive.
As you will recall from the debate at Cabinet, we are also in discussion with a local group
regarding incorporating heat vault technology
for energy storage at Otipool, if possible.
I am happy to consider all emerging sustainable power generation
and carbon reduction technologies,
but they must be financially viable,
scalable for the development of this size,
and also give our residents a choice of supplier and value for money.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:08:57
Thank you. Do you have a related question?
Cllr David Godfrey - 0:09:01
Yes, please. Thank you for that. Very good points.
Given that the article chart said we wanted 50 % green oven space,
could we not actually mandate that all buildings had solar panels
rather than have another solar array covering a large amount of ground,
given that we actually turned down another application
for a solar array a couple of weeks back?
Councillor Martin.
Thank you very much.
Yeah.
At the moment, every building will have solar panels.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:09:33
So every home, that is part of the overall agreement with Synergy.
So it isn't and or it's and.
So it is a solar array will build.
and the reason why we need it first
is it puts us into net zero territory.
So as the buildings come through,
we will always be in front of the curve rather than behind the curve.
If we left it to when the buildings are built and then the solar,
then we're always chasing net zero.
If we do it the other way round and use the solar array first,
Not only do we stay in front of that net zero curve, but we also, not to a huge extent,
but to some extent, we address the embodied energy in the construction process.
So I'm very confident that in terms of the open space, no impact on the open space at
all.
And just let me take this opportunity.
The Otterpool charter is still fully adhered to.
So our third question is from Councillor Mrs Hollingsby to Councillor Jim Martin.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:10:48
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee - 0:10:52
Princess Parade Hive was allocated for mixed use development to include up to 150 residential
dwellings, a leisure centre, commercial uses including hotel use and public open space
in the 2020 Places and Policies Local Plan, which, after an examination in public, was
adopted by full council on 22 July 2020. The Grant Thornton audit report for 23 -24 shows
this land has been re -designated amenity land with a loss value of 17 .2 million. Surely
this is unacceptable. If the council cannot demonstrate that it has an adequate supply
of housing land, it will be highly vulnerable to challenge by developers of public inquiry.
The result of this could be that the council loses appeals on housing sites and development
comes forward in less sustainable locations. Will the leader confirm that the Princess
parade development land with planning permission, which is in the council's ownership, will
be included in the new local plan.
Councillor Jim Muslin.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:12:09
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:12:11
Thank you for your question, Councillor Hollingsby.
As you know, a topic very close to my heart.
The council is at an early stage in producing the next local plan.
This is likely to be a three -year process.
We are currently preparing evidence to support the new local plan
while we are waiting for the government to publish the secondary legislation
that would allow a formal start to the process.
The government has said the new local plan system will be brought into force
in summer of league autumn 2025
and we have no more definitive time scale at this time.
As your excellent question recognises, we will be under pressure from the Government's
new development targets to maximise every development opportunity, subject to the significant
constraints we have across the district.
We are therefore likely to undertake several call for sites as part of the local plan process
to make sure that we have a full understanding of what sites may be available and suitable
to be allocated for development.
Currently, we cannot say what sites will or will not be included in the local plan, as
prospective sites will need to be thoroughly assessed to ensure that they are deliverable
and likely to come forward within the local plan period and will stand up to scrutiny
by the planning inspectors at a public examination.
Regarding the Princess Parade site specifically, there have been many schemes and many proposals
over the years to develop the site, but the engineering constraints on the site have meant
that all of these schemes have proved unviable.
You are of course aware that the initial public consultation on the future of the site has
recently been held which closed on the 16th of February this year.
We received 1 ,472 individual responses from the public on what they wanted to see the
site used for.
Officers are currently reviewing these comments and the results of the consultation will be
reported back to members in due course.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:14:40
Do you have a related supplementary question?
Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee - 0:14:44
Yes, thank you. Thank you for that comprehensive report. Close to my heart as well, of course,
we have that conversation time and time again. What I would ask is, is the leader aware that,
as I understand it, there is an offer on the table for Princess Parade for £21 million?
Councillor Martin.
I am unaware.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:15:11
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:15:11
Thank you. So moving on to question 4 from Councillor Keene to Councillor Jim Martin.
Cllr Nicola Keen - 0:15:16
Cllr Nicola Keen - 0:15:24
Thank you. For 2015 the Council purchased the land at Otterpool for 5 million. In the
sales document the previous landowner requested permission to maintain a small shoo on the
Did the council grant shooting rights and were these rights to shoot wild animals?
Councillor Martin.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:15:40
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:15:44
Thank you very much Councillor Keene for your very interesting and important question.
I am not as familiar as perhaps I should be with the specific details of all of the sales
documents from 2015.
But I can confirm that this council has not granted animal shooting rights on land at
Otterpool or indeed anywhere else.
Do you have a related question?
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:16:08
Cllr Nicola Keen - 0:16:09
I have a related question.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:16:11
And question five from Councillor Keane to Councillor Shubbe.
Thank you.
Councillor Shubbe, would it be possible for folks in Hyde District
Cllr Nicola Keen - 0:16:20
Council to put up on
website, a list of where we will be completing the carbon improvement work, what work is
to be completed and dates that work is due to take place. This would not only help tenants
when they are planning holidays etc. but also help councillors see what work is being completed
in their ward.
Councillor Shueb.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:16:44
Cllr Rebecca Shoob - 0:16:46
Thank you for your question, Councillor Keene.
Since being awarded social housing decarbonisation funding to help us install energy efficient
measures into 425 of our council homes across the past two and a half years, we've invested
8 .2 million in bringing our worst performing homes up to EPCC and above.
In line with the commitments of the housing asset management strategy, we're looking to
increase the EPC energy rating of all council homes to at least C by 2030.
The social housing decarbonisation fund programme is administered by the Department for Energy,
Security and Net Zero and qualifying homes have to meet very strict criteria to be included
in the programme.
In wave one we focused on homes with an energy rating of below D, so that's E, F and G.
And Wave 2 has been more Es and Ds.
By working in this way, we're tackling the worst performing homes at first, and we're
very pleased to be able to say that currently 73 .7 % of the Council's homes are rated at
EPCC or above.
Since the beginning of Wave 2, we've discovered that the EPC data we've previously held has
been superseded largely by the greening of the power network resulting in more
properties falling into Bannsey and whilst of course this is very positive
it has made the program works far more unpredictable. There's now a requirement
to carry out more assessments where design reviews are necessary to achieve
desired outcomes and in some cases the removal of properties from the program
the substitute properties being identified
to meet the required criteria.
The properties are mainly selected on their EPC rating
once the EPC has been validated, at which point
the tenants are informed of the inclusion of their property
in the program.
We're not able to go into the detail requested,
such as addresses, measures, and dates for future installs,
as at the early stages, we don't know which properties will
be included on the programme and we don't want to raise tenants' expectations if the
property isn't suitable for the programme at this time.
Obviously we appreciate the benefits of sharing information with our ward councillors and
other tenants but for the reasons just mentioned we're not able to provide enough detail to
give certainty of inclusion in the programme or dates when the work may be carried out.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:19:30
Do you have a supplementary question?
Cllr Nicola Keen - 0:19:35
Cllr Nicola Keen - 0:19:35
Can you tell me when ward councillors
will be made aware of what work is
happening in their wards because that
hasn't been done? Councillor Shue.
Let me get back to you.
I'll speak to officers about
Cllr Rebecca Shoob - 0:19:46
that and see what we can do.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:19:58
Question 6 from Councillor Keene to Councillor Jeremy Speakman.
Cllr Nicola Keen - 0:20:02
Councillor Speakman, could we please have an update on what is happening with the Lees
Cliff Hall?
What work is needed and what work is scheduled to take place please?
Councillor Speakman.
Cllr Jeremy Speakman - 0:20:19
Thank you Councillor Keene for your excellent question and good evening.
Yes, I'm happy to give you an update.
As you recall, you raised this question about repairs
to Leescliff Hall at the November Fool Council.
And as I mentioned then, we were going to visit, which we did.
The visit was with Councilman Blakemore
and with council officers actually
took place later that month.
And during the course of which, we met the venue management
and also saw first -hand repairs completed and repairs ongoing.
ATG, who are the leaseholders, have a full repairing lease
backed by an ongoing maintenance schedule.
Recent works have included upgrading the Wi -Fi
and resounding the main floor,
along with the usual regular painting and decorating.
I mentioned in my November response
the difficult challenges the building faces
due to its age, construction,
and water encroachment from the cliffs
weathering also to the front of the building.
We actually saw this first hand on our visit when we viewed the windows on the front of
the building which had been repaired and replaced at various points during the lease but still
required further repair.
And most notably we saw the water encroachment damage to the east and west public corridors
on level 7.
There are other repairs needed but those are the ones that really stood out.
So we discussed the corridor damage in some detail with ATG
and the key problem is that the water is coming in from the cliff face
through the building membrane, and this has been going on for years.
There isn't any obvious solution.
And before any repairs can be made, the walls need to dry out,
which will take time, so we can't really put a time scale
because it has to be dried out and obviously we had a wet summer last year.
ATG are very aware of the visual impact this has on visitors to the building and have attempted
several repairs which we saw.
They are aware of their obligations to repair but for the reason explained it is difficult
to get the timeline.
So overall we were able to see the maintenance had taken place of the building over the period
of lease and it is also worth saying that in terms of ticket sales and emissions the
lease they call is actually enjoying record numbers.
So looking to the future and the end of the lease in June 26, the property team commissioned
a condition survey and structural report of the buildings which compared the current maintenance
schedule to works completed and prepared a new maintenance schedule as the basis for
any subsequent use.
Do you have a related question?
Okay, thank you.
Question 7 from Councillor Cooper to Councillor Shoebe.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:23:09
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr Tony Cooper - 0:23:11
Councillor Shoebe, given the catastrophe of your grand tour,
I've been contacted by a large number of presidents who tell me
that either wrong or inadequate fire safety doors
have allegedly been fitted by the council to tenants' properties.
Can you confirm if that's correct?
If so, when did it happen, when did the affected tenants located,
what has the council done about it?
And in other words, if this is true,
does the council have a replacement fire safety door plan in place
and when can the affected tenants expect to receive it?
Thank you.
Councillor Shoop.
Thank you.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:23:42
Cllr Rebecca Shoob - 0:23:43
Thank you for your question, Councillor Cooper.
Since the housing service came back in -house,
the main focus of the team has been ensuring
that our homes are safe for our tenants to live in.
Our compliance statistics for the Big Six regulatory areas
are nearly always 100%,
only dropping below this when tenants refuse access.
I can confirm that we are compliant with the Regulatory Reform Order 2005 in our methods
and installations for fire doors.
We must make all reasonable efforts to provide a programme of works to replace any doors
that are deemed to be defective or not fit for purpose.
We have a clear program of replacements for flat entrance doors and communal doors based on the information provided by our appointed fully qualified fire risk assessment company.
All of our fire risk assessments are up to date.
We carry out fire risk assessments to all of our communal areas at the approved intervals which is either every year or every two years depending on risk.
It's not a requirement to check each and every door during the assessments, but we
carry out the industry -recognized percentage of flat entrance door checks.
Should there be any reason to suspect deficiencies in the integrity of doors to a whole block,
we would consider renewing all the doors.
We will gather any historic information that we have, but the key to fire safety is not
what went on historically, it's what plans we have in place now. We are
proactive and have a very robust plan in place for all aspects of fire safety and
the team are confident in this regard. I can assure you Councillor Cooper and our
tenants that we are compliant and have a good productive relationship with Kent
Fire and Rescue Service. Councillor Cooper you mentioned that you've been
contacted by a large number of residents about concerns with their fire doors.
Could I ask you please to provide all
their details and I will arrange for
all concerned tenants to be contacted
and arrange for their doors to be inspected.
Do you have a related question?
Thank you, Councilor.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:26:04
Cllr Tony Cooper - 0:26:05
She got reassuring and I will tell
everyone to make contact with the
Department of AP and if any tenants
who's watching this is also concerned.
I would urge them as well to contact
the housing Department. Thank you.

6 Portfolio Holder reports to Council

Cllr Anita Jones - 0:26:18
Thank you. So we'll move on to item six on our agenda, announcements of the leader of
the Council. We'll have ten minutes for Councillor Jim Martin to give us his announcements.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:26:35
Thank you very much, Chair. So good evening, Councillors. It seems like only yesterday
or possibly last week that we were all together.

7 Announcements of the Leader of the Council

But meeting you all of course is always a pleasure.
And a good thing about meeting frequently
is that I have less to say.
So I am sure you will all welcome my brevity of topics.
Since we last met I have attended an all -parish meeting
with the Kent Association of Local Councils, CALP,
hosted by Stanford Parish to discuss local government reorganization in Kent.
I have further meetings scheduled with towns and parishes, and I am happy to attend meetings
regarding local government reorganization, either public or private, with any town or
parish council that wishes to invite me.
I've also held meetings and discussions regarding
Otterfield Park, I won't go into the detail of,
but it's a continuation with Homes England
consultants, developers, et cetera.
I was delighted to attend the first youth forum
in this chamber this morning.
And I am delighted to report that contrary
to almost everything one reads in the media, we can have great confidence in our young
people as a source of ideas, innovation and hard work. We will be safe in their hands.
I am also delighted to hear that our returning officer is making arrangements to invite a
small number of young observers from the Youth Forum to attend the KCC election count on
Friday the 2nd of May this year.
I have again met with other Kent leaders and discussions continue with regard to the submission
of our proposals for unitary formation to the Government on the 21st of March.
Several member districts are clearly promoting a four unitary solution while others are promoting
a three unitary solution.
I am holding the position I previously discussed with councillors.
I remain open minded on a three or four unitary system and feel that we need to do the detailed
analysis and work before I can argue for one position against another.
Generally, the thinking is a four unitary model is more democratic,
but it produces unitaries of less than 500 ,000 minimum required by the government.
The three unitary model is less democratic, but exceeds the 500 ,000 minimum
and is therefore viewed as more sustainable in the government's eyes.
The government has made it clear that it will impose
its preferred solution if it differs from ours.
The final submission will be made
on the 28th of November this year.
Between January and, so sorry, just to give you a rundown,
so we submit in March, March the 21st,
and then the next thing we hear,
I'm sure there'll be conversations,
but the next milestone date is the 28th of November
and that's when the decision is made by the government.
Between January and May 2026,
the government will begin its consultation on the unitary formations
on an expected the Minister is minded to basis.
This is likely to lead to a final decision by the Minister in August 2026.
If this timetable is remotely adhered to, we will have months rather than years to integrate
our services with whichever of our neighbours we have been merged with.
The first opportunity for the election of the new unitary
appears to be May 2027,
after which we are scheduled to be abolished.
The government is still talking about shadow unitaries.
This is a car crash of a timetable,
and many people think that district councillors
may be asked to extend their term by one year.
I don't know that for certain, right?
So don't shoot me.
To allow more time for services to be transferred.
So just taking a break from the script here.
This is not an announcement.
This is an inevitable conclusion that one draws
when you look at the timetable.
So I am particularly, I will keep council
and all councillors fully updated as the process continues.
I am particularly keen to hear emerging views
of our residents and plan to hold a public meeting
in this chamber from 6 p .m. on Monday the 17th of March.
So this meeting will be for town and parish councillors,
it will be for members of the public, rather than your good selves,
although you are all naturally invited.
But you know a great deal about this.
The public knows very little about it as yet.
Dr Priest, our CEO, will give a presentation and I will take questions.
So that's on Monday 17th March.
More information will be made available on our website
and I would be grateful to all members
for promoting this opportunity for the public to engage.
After which I hope both Council and Cabinet
will consider the proposed submission.
Just breaking from the script again,
I was at a leaders meeting today
where we were looking at the first sort of pieces
of this puzzle and as I understand it, we may see a rough draft by the 10th of March.
But before the submission is made, sorry about this everyone, but I am going to call another
council meeting.
We're not sure whether that's going to be on the 18th or the 20th as yet, but I am not
going to do this without everybody participating.
So I'm going to call another meeting.
We're going to look at what the potential submission will be and you can give me a steer,
as I'm sure you will.
Can I mention at this point how hard the senior management team have been working on local
government reorganisation as it affects everything we do and colours every decision and action
we take.
It's honestly like a juggling blindfolded.
So well done to the senior management team.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:34:22
Thank you and then we have the opposition response.
So Councillor Lockwood you have five minutes.
Cllr Adrian Lockwood - 0:34:26
Thank you Chair, good evening everyone.
And I want to thank the items.
As Councillor Martin said, it's CALC and U4 and LGR.
I was very impressed this morning
with seeing so many young people here.
I was very sorry I could only pop in and thank staff
and Councillors that have brought this together
before leaving to go and give a talk up in planet,
but very impressive to see and thank you for everyone
for bringing this forward.
It's something obviously the Labour group have been campaigning for
for many years and it's just wonderful to see it come to fruition.
So thank you for that.
Thank you for a very clear explanation of the LGR.
I think that's one of the clearest I've seen people mention.
definitely clearer than anything that's coming from Central East.
I think at some point you said that the final decision is made in 28th November,
but I just think that we submit in 28th November and the decision is made in late 26th,
so just to pick up on that.
I think having the meeting here is good, if you can screen it,
and that means people can watch from wherever they are.
Perhaps you could confirm at the end if,
my understanding is that we're a bit of an outlier on this.
I don't think there are many other councils
for having public meetings,
and I'm not sure any others are having debates, votes.
But it would be good to get an update on that if you could.
And then just finally, that no update on the situation
that this council put itself in with respect
to not knowing what our governance arrangements
will be in 10 weeks time.
And I can't be the only person in this room
that's wondering where they're gonna be sat
in 10 weeks time after the AGM.
colleagues there, thank you.
Thank you, and Councillor Mrs. Hollingsby.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:36:58
Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Leader.
I think I can tell you where we'll be sitting
Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee - 0:37:06
in 10 weeks time, exactly where we are.
And thank you for your, yeah.
We will remain as a cabinet system,
and we will be sitting where we currently are.
Thank you for your meetings with the parish councils.
I think it's very useful.
I'm sorry that I wasn't able to attend
the youth forum this morning,
but I was already committed as you know.
But I would like to say congratulations Anita
and to anybody else to the officers who helped organize it.
Very well done and very interested in the results
and thank you.
Yeah, Kent leaders and the local government reorganization.
I agree with Adrian, with Councillor Lockwood,
that this is a very clear indication of where we're going,
even if you are surmising some of the information,
but it's very, very helpful, and thank you for that.
I think the public meeting is a good idea,
and I hope it will be strained,
because that's really important.
I don't know about other people,
whether they're looking forward to another year,
but maybe that's something that's going to happen.
Who knows? But we will wait and see.
I would reiterate your thanks to the senior management team.
Of course, that's one of the reasons why I put forward
the continuation of the cabinet system,
because there is so much work to do
that we need our senior management team
to focus on what's best for this district.
I think Councillor Lockwood is also right
in that we're probably one of the only councils
who are currently having these meetings,
like an update like this,
or briefings like we've been having,
and please keep them up.
I keep in contact with my counterparts in East Kent,
and I can say that not many of them are actually having these kinds of meetings.
So, thank you.
Thank you. Councillor Martin, you have five minutes to write your reply.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:39:28
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:39:30
Thank you very much, Chair. I won't take five minutes.
Councillor Lockwood is absolutely right.
I was incorrect. Our submission is the 28th of November.
The decision will be at the Minister's pleasure.
He is also right and indeed Councillor Hollingsby is correct.
And I'm sorry guys, but I will keep
bombarding members with this.
I will not go into this alone.
There are other council leaders who kind of recoil in horror
when I said that we were having a public meeting
and that we would put it before the full council.
So, I'm not criticizing.
There are very different atmospheres,
very different situations.
So, I understand you have to tell your product
to meet your own individual circumstances.
But, yeah, all I can do, Gia, is apologize in advance
because it won't end here, believe me.
I will keep bringing this back over and over and over again
because we go into this together.
Everybody's view is valid on this
and I need to take all of them on board.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We need to have a proposer and a seconder.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:41:00
Happy to propose.
I'm happy to second.
Councillor Pritchett second.
And then are we all agreed?
Cllr Tim Prater - 0:41:07
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:41:08
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:41:09
So item seven, we have no opposition business again this week.

8 Opposition Business

Item eight, there are no motions on notice.

9 Motions on Notice

10 Revenue Budget, Capital Strategy, Capital Programme, Reserves and Balances, Treasury and Investment Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy and Council Tax for 2025/26

So we're going to move on to item nine, the revenue budget, capital strategy,
capital program reserves and balances, treasury and investment strategy,
and MTFS and council tax 2526.
Do we have a proposer?
Councillor Prater, would you like to speak on this?
Cllr Tim Prater - 0:41:40
No, you're right. Yeah, okay, hang on. Evening all. Let's do this thing. There's a really
significant saving hidden in this budget report and one that you're going to like. Prior to
this administration, many budget papers were moved individually. That could have given
me upwards of 20 minutes to extol the merits of the reports and 20 minutes to sum up on
them. With the approach taken by this administration, I'm going to get 10 minutes in total. So I
I can only imagine your disappointment.
I'd also like to apologise, but it's not our fault, for the bombardment that you've had
with amendments and papers coming, updating the papers in front of you.
It's done without apology because we want to make sure that you had the right, that
you had the final figures come forward.
So for instance, where the pay award for staff was agreed, our ballot closed on Monday and
we only knew the result of that on Monday, the result of that is actually within the
papers that you've had. And obviously you couldn't issue the papers on the basis of
a paywall that hadn't been agreed by that stage by staff, so that's why things like
that, there are a number of changes coming through, as well as ridiculously late, like
five more local government settlements and things like that. However, we are where we
are, and you've had all of the papers and the amendments to those papers and the addendums
to those papers, so I'll raffle through the considerable achievements of this budget.
The services are protected. There are no cuts to frontline services.
It's a 2 .99 % increase in council tax, which is an increase of under 75p a month.
That's lower than inflation. It's also lower than the total increase of our colleagues
at Kent County Council for their significantly bigger preset. But we'll put that to one side.
Money is put aside within the new financial stability reserve to give us a clear source
of financial changes that this council faces over the coming years.
That gives us some cover for a potential write -off on the Prince's Parade costs
from the previous administration.
It gives us some cover to protect staff from some threatened actions.
It gives us some cover for potential check cost of challenge to council decisions.
It also gives some provision towards local government reorganisation that we're going
to need coming forward over the next couple of years.
We hope we don't need that money.
We hope we won't spend it, but we have put it aside because that's the prudent thing
to do.
And as a budget, if this is a budget which does not use our general council reserves
to balance it, it is a properly balanced budget.
As I was mulling on that, it gave me cause to check the MTFS four year projection of
the previous administration set in 2022.
That was the one that forecast an £18 .5 million deficit over the following four years. We
couldn't let that ride because it would have bankrupted this authority. And we haven't.
This administration has changed those numbers. The actual result for 23 -24 was a deficit
of just £65 ,000. That's due to the huge in -year savings that were achieved on the budget which
was set. We had a break -even budget for this year and we'll meet it. We're tonight proposing
a break -even budget for next year.
And we'll meet it.
I'm not hiding.
We're currently forecasting a deficit for the following year of £723 ,000.
And that's not comfortable.
But given the other changes happening around us, I'm sure it will change.
But even with that in, compared to the 2022 MTFS projection of £18 .5 million deficit,
we're now expecting that total to be less than £1 million.
it is a £17 .5 million turnaround in that projection.
That's a testament to the staff and to the officers of this council.
They delivered a transformation programme that saved this council millions.
They've also personally delivered above and beyond for this council
and our residents every year.
It's also thanks to the councillors in this room
who supported those officers in finding those savings last year
and supported the difficult decisions which have got us to this place.
And a key part of that work is the work of the members of the Cross Party,
and very independent, Finance and Performance Scrutiny Subcommittee.
They looked at the various strands of this Budget at their meeting on the 4th of February.
And as ever, I'd like to thank all members of that Subcommittee
for their time and detailed considerations of the proposals,
and they got to see it paper by paper.
And I'd also like to thank the seven online responses to our budget
consultation this year.
Matt is up from four last year, which is good, and this year didn't include a
response from me, which is even better.
There was no strong consensus from those replies, but they are before you, and they
have been heard.
We are seeking to keep council tax down.
We are seeking to protect frontline services, and we're looking to bring new life to
folks in town centre with lots of the levelling up fund works actually starting in this
year.
We'll see a real difference to Folkestone over the next 12 months.
Most of all on this budget, it's thanks to Mona Soler and Daniella and Jonathan and Lydia,
who, as I noted at last night's audit and governance meeting, have sweated blood to
get this budget to us.
Thank you all.
You know this wouldn't have happened without you.
I should also mention that at that audit and governance meeting, they received the auditor's
unqualified 23 -24 accounts.
And we also only have the final certificates for 2019 onwards.
As of this day, we have a fully signed off audit for every year prior to now.
That's the first time we can say that for the last five years.
So how have we done this?
Currently projected under spend in this financial year.
We'll be using BAT to support next year's budget.
And where there are earmarked and ring -fenced reserves for specific purposes,
they'll be used for those specific purposes.
So if expenditure arises for those, we'll use those reserves for that.
So where we have money to spend on homelessness,
and where we have a need to spend money on homelessness,
we will spend it on homelessness.
It's rainy day money in those reserves.
On council, it's raining.
So I know there's no such thing as a budget that pleases everyone,
as we all know that pleasing everyone's not one of my core skills anyway.
However, I hope you'd agree that given where we are, this is a balanced and a competent
budget that protects services and delivers for our district.
I hope that the people in this room can support that balanced and competent budget and at
least not oppose it.
I look forward to hearing your input over the course of the debate and try and address
as many of those views as I can in summing up on it.
So I move the budget and recommendations on Report A2420.
Thank you and do you have a seconder?
Councillor Martin.
Very happy to second.
Did you want to speak on that?
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:48:34
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:48:34
I seconded.
No?
That's fine.
So this is open for debate now.
Do we need to move this by a show of hands it says on my notes?
Sorry.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:48:52
Thank you.
Councillor Lockwood.
Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Councillor Craitor,
Cllr Adrian Lockwood - 0:49:00
for summing that up again.
Another complicated thing that you presented simply for us.
I certainly appreciate that.
I'd start by saying that anybody that works
in our finance team or has worked on this budget
or indeed the audited accounts
and getting all those previous years signed off and so on,
should watch Councillor Prater's thank you
from Boarding Government's meeting last night
on the webcast.
I can't better that.
So I'm gonna echo his words and add to that
the fact that on top of all of that audit work,
bringing this budget together is an incredible feat.
So I applaud that team and I thank them.
I had some points around some of the areas
within the budget, I'm just, I'm gonna make one point
tonight and it's a point of principle.
Most Councillors get the information contained in these reports five days,
five working days before. That's no one's fault. We don't know what the government
settlement is. We don't know what pay awards are. So that's nothing anyone can do about that.
So given that most of us are not involved in the budgeting process, I think to ask us
to look at what's supplied and vote with confidence that we agree with everything in there is
a bit of a stretch.
So for me personally, I think there are three things that we should consider.
Firstly, what you presented.
Secondly, the skill and abilities and competence of our finance team.
And then thirdly, that portfolio holders have been through Star Chamber,
been through this line by line, and we're reassured by our Chief Executive
that cabinet members have our best interests, or our constituents' best interests at heart.
So we take that.
My point is that if we have all of those three things in place,
the documentation, the understanding that our team are brilliant
and they've steered our portfolio holders through this,
and we have confidence in our portfolio holders
that they have got the best interest of our constituents at heart,
then we can feel confident and vote for this budget.
But for me, the group that, the portfolio holder group, have so recently betrayed that
trust, I don't feel confident that that is in place.
So for that reason, I cannot vote for this budget.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Cllr Anita Jones - 0:52:26
Councillor, Mrs. Hollingsby.
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr Jennifer Hollingsbee - 0:52:33
Thank you, Councillor Prita.
It was quite, I nearly timed it.
I think you did quite well.
First of all, I would like to say thanks to the Finance Team.
I know how hard you have to work.
I know it's not an easy task and I know that it is an extremely challenging time.
There's just a few points I'd like to make and I'm surprised that Councillor Lockwood
has not mentioned the 2 .99 % Council tax rise.
Yes, of course, we will probably do it.
But I do believe that one of the manifestos
was that council tax would not rise or be frozen.
And I just wonder, and it's not that,
it's just our council tax.
We've got cost of living for everybody going up.
We've got Kent County Council, we've got the fire service,
we've got the police service, obviously,
and the cost of living is, for some people,
a real challenge, and especially with the energy costs
going up now as well.
So, you know, it does worry me that we are doing this.
I know we have to.
I know it's what we have to do,
but I think Councilor Pater said,
I can't remember how much a month is it,
but for a band -aid it's about 8 .85, 8 .85.
Also, in terms of the national insurance contributions,
employers' national insurance contributions,
you know, that's actually added to our costs,
and the government have not,
have only reimbursed us for about half.
So I think we've had to pay or at least undertake
260 ,000 roundabout.
Roundabout, I'm sure Councillor Perroto will tell me
if I'm wrong, and that's actually only for one year.
It's not going to happen next year.
So there is an issue there.
As I mentioned earlier in my question,
We were really very concerned about the revaluation of Princhers Parade.
It seems an awful lot of money.
I know it's an asset and it's not in terms of real money as it is at the moment, it's
an asset, but it's an asset that we should have.
It is ours, it belongs to the council, it has planning permission, it's gone through
a public inquiry, so I think it should remain as an asset.
And I'm absolutely surprised that the auditors
have signed it off as amenity land.
And I suppose perhaps my,
oh, and I didn't, there is one place, oh yes.
Councillor Prater also talks about previous administration,
but in this report and in the auditor's report,
we hear the council's past strong financial performance and robust position.
That's mentioned in the auditor's report and in this report.
I think that perhaps you might remember that. Thank you very much.
I'll go back to this one.
Another point, I don't know the page now,
But you talk about, within the report,
you talk about obviously the support for Otterfield Park
as it's in the local plan.
Well Princess Parade is also in the local plan.
And then I just perhaps picked up a couple of points
from the auditor's report where there are two recommendations
that do need to be addressed and don't seem to have been addressed
with saying more accurate forecasting
on capital expenditure and should develop
a list of savings to avoid further depletion of reserves.
So I wonder if you can just answer that
in terms of those items being addressed.
And I think that's all my points at the moment.
Thank you very much.
Councillor Godfrey.
Thank you.
Cllr David Godfrey - 0:57:30
Well unlike some people in public positions, my CV does not make claims of expertise in
the financial area.
However I do believe that I could identify a few things where they don't quite add up.
So I'm just going to refer to pages 75 and 76 of the report which state that except for
the council has no significant capital reserves and major schemes will require prudential
borrowing.
And page 76 4 .3 says we are going to have to borrow 23 million for a leisure centre
and 360 ,000 for borrowing for Princess Parade.
Incidentally it says that borrowing will also enable, it takes into account revenues after
interest payments and I'm not quite sure what revenues we know about through this parade
because we don't know what's going to happen to it yet.
As we heard from the leader in response to my question earlier, we don't actually have
a site identified for a student court or a leisure centre and we've only just instructed
officers to go ahead and start investigating proper costumes for this.
Now, two years ago, before the last administration was removed,
we'd actually paused it. We hadn't cancelled it.
We'd pause work on this to do that exact job,
to go away and re -evaluate and see what should happen.
We didn't get the chance to, because immediately the new administration
at some stage decided to re -value the land as a community land.
I don't know who took that decision,
but our independent land valuer then decided
it was going to reduce the value by 17 .2 million.
Last night at the Auden Gubbers meeting,
Councillor Prater said it would cost that to remediate the land.
Yet she said it would cost that amount to remediate the land.
Now, I can recall in 2021 the budget that was approved
for Princess Freya that time included land remediation.
We had nothing like that sort of number,
so I don't know where that comes from.
I don't think the Princess Breakside is over.
And I think there are some question marks
around where these revenues have come from.
I don't think we can truthfully say
that PMR 23 million for a ledger centre
because we don't know what it's going to cost.
And it's because of that,
I don't think I'm going to be able to vote in favour of this budget.
It does blips as though we've got no real sign
of when the district will get a new leisure centre
and will be even more expensive if funded by burrowing,
which currently is about 4 .5%.
Meanwhile, we'll continue to hemorrhage thousands of pounds
maintained in the high school,
which is increasingly deteriorating,
while still paying one of the highest council taxes in the South East,
which the new administration said they'd have them bring down.
So, I'm afraid I'm not going to be able to vote for this budget.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councillor Wimple.
Thank you, Chair.
It might surprise you I'm probably going to vote for this budget, which might shock some
people to the left of me.
Reason being, my main concerns, we've already dealt with this tonight when Councillor Martin
mentioned about the uncertain future of this Council. By voting against it or abstaining,
we're just continuing with the uncertainty. At the moment we know where the answers lie,
Mr Prater here, and I do have full confidence in our team sat over the back there who help
with the finances and the budget. My main concerns are if we do become a unitary council and join
with Ashford and Dover, Thanet, Canterbury or whoever,
Cllr David Wimble - 1:01:30
is what happens with our assets that are built into the budget.
Do they disappear and go to help somebody in Thanet?
I don't think they do, because they are our assets.
But numbers have never been my big thing,
which is why I was so shocked to find out
that I've been put on the committee dealing with the accounts.
It was done when I wasn't here, I hastened to that.
Councillor Prater has gone through these with the team and the officers, and I can't believe
that any Councillor of any colour or any persuasion would put in place something that was deemed
bad for this district. So for that reason I will back him because if we delay this any
longer it's just more uncertainty, more officer time. If it works out and it doesn't work
Then we look at our administration and everyone will know who to blame or who to praise.
Thank you.
Councillor Davison.
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr Laura Davison - 1:02:37
Yeah, a couple of questions and clarifications.
On the community grant schedule part of the papers in front of us, pleased to see obviously
there is funding there for Folkestone Sports Centre contribution and also for the Citizens
Advice Bureau.
As people know, the Sports Centre has been closed since last summer, but it's good to
see a provision being made against the future for that.
The Citizens Advice Bureau for the district sadly closed at the end of last year, so it
would just be helpful to understand what that funding means for residents.
Do we have detail around what that's going to be used for?
What provision will there be for people, thanks to that funding being included in the budget?
And then my other question was, at the January full council meeting, the council voted to
change its position in relation to moving from a cabinet system to a committee system.
Councillor Prater proposed an amendment on that night around the budget.
Councillor Hollingsby said we'd find the money down the back of the sofa to pay for the 50 ,000
that was factored in as a saving because we wouldn't be paying cabinet allowances under
the committee system.
So could Councillor Prater just clarify how we dealt with that point?
Thank you.
Council Mike Blickmore.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:04:10
Cllr Mike Blakemore - 1:04:13
Thank you, Chair. Yes, I agree with
Council Hollingsby that it's always
regrettable to have to put up a council
tax even if it is only by 2 .99 % as
Councilor Prater said below the rate of
inflation, but I think we have to bear
in mind that local government funding in
real terms has been reduced by 20 % since,
by 21 % since 2010. Obviously for most of that time it was a conservative government that
was doing that. Although I would say in more recent times since Labour have come to power
they've ended the revenue support grant for local councils, for this and other councils,
and they have only covered the increase in employer national insurance to the tune of
50%. I'd also say I don't think my party ever promised to bring down council tax because
we didn't think we could.
Councillor Keene.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:05:05
Cllr Nicola Keen - 1:05:10
I'm a bit confused where we're going to get $23 million for a new sports facility.
Well we haven't got land for it as Councillor Godfrey said.
But prior to the administration going into Folkestone we did have a building that we
could have put some money into to give the people of Folkestone a swimming pool and a
and an area of land that we could have possibly built social or affordable housing on. Can
I be clear on why now we can afford the 23 million for a sports centre but we didn't
have that money when our sports centre was being closed down?
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:05:48
Councillor Scofford. I acknowledge the enormous amount of work
Cllr Stephen Scoffham - 1:05:53
that's gone into the budget and I think it's an incredible achievement and that's something
I'd really like to acknowledge and I'm very happy to support it.
I have been noting, given my portfolio and the climate change reserve
is obviously something that feeds straight into my portfolio,
I have looked at that in a little bit of extra care as it were.
Appendix 3 on page 50,
basically the climate change reserve
is not drawn on them very much in the current year.
But if you look towards the end of 2026,
the figures go down quite dramatically.
So on page 50, we chose a reserve
being reduced by approximately 2 million,
and that leaves approximately 1 million
at the end of the whole process.
If you quite pretend to appendix 6 on page 97,
The reserve is reduced by 3 million which leaves just 111 ,000 in the reserve.
I'm very sad to see the reserve getting lower.
I understand why it's getting lower.
It's enabled us to do all sorts of things including having a climate change officer
which I think is a wonderful thing to have and it's also the source of the money for the Green Grants.
And at the moment to mention that the Green Grants are up on the website
and we're waiting for applications as from this morning.
So that's wonderful news.
I really would like to acknowledge the benefit
that as a portfolio holder for time
that I received in having a climate change fund
and I'm looking across the room to a conservative bench for that.
So very useful to have had that reserve.
I understand how it is essential to balance the books
and that in a way is one of the benefits of this reserve.
I like to think that what we're looking at for the figures for the end of 2026 are contingencies
that reserve won't actually drop as low as 111 ,000 and should it be possible to replenish
it, I'd very much welcome that to happen and I'm certain that would be something that other
members would be keen to see as well.
So I just wanted to say that while supporting the budget on the way that it's been done
or not.
Thank you.
Councillor Meade.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:08:12
Cllr Jackie Meade - 1:08:16
Thank you chair. I've got some queries if I may. Oh sorry, excuse me. We've got inclusion
here in our budget, the KCC empty property which is like 1 .200 thousand but that's money
that's coming from KCC. I don't understand why that should be shown on our budget. Yes,
It's a service that we are providing with someone else's money,
so I don't understand why that's in our budget.
The Biggins Wood site, I believe we sold that site,
so I'm just wondering why we've still got £325 ,000
going into remediation works on there.
Could be wrong, I thought we'd sold that.
The Coast Drive seafront development,
Is that known as something else?
Yeah, beach arts.
Beach arts? We're going to spend 1 .4 million pounds on beach arts?
That's crazy. I'm sorry. That's absolutely crazy when we've got residents
and their windows are falling out, as we mentioned last week.
And the last one is Oportunitas.
Oportunitas has been running for an awfully long time
and has never actually shown a profit.
If they were actually a private company,
actually out in the wild world,
they would have been closed by now.
Yes, we get 4 .2%,
but they're borrowing money continually.
So I'm sorry, there are too many things,
but I'd really appreciate some coming back.
Oh, and the Green Grant Fund,
I'd be very interested to know,
because I believe that this green grant
that is being taken from our reserves
will also be used by companies
to put in air source heat pumps,
and I'm just wondering why we're allowing our reserves
to be put into companies
that if they were really that serious about it,
would probably do it themselves or possibly find the grants from central government. Thank
you.
Councillor Cooper.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:10:38
Cllr Tony Cooper - 1:10:42
Thank you, Chair. Can I refer Councillor Fraser please to page 77 of the report? I see that
we've got waste contract acquisition of vehicles at £260 ,000. I'm a little confused about
that because I believe that the viola will actually provide the waste services to the
are actually a private company and I'm just wondering why we're using council taxpayers'
money in respect of a private company because my view has always been that council taxpayers
should be applied into services and not into private company profits. That's point number
one. The second point is I think the staff should be thanked and it be noted, Royal Work
and the stress that they've been under recently and take a patter back in the department there
regarding that. And the third point I want to make is this. At the start of this debate
it was mentioned that there was a lack of time for people to actually study these documents
properly. I didn't get the documents until Monday and all the people got them Friday
Saturday. I didn't get them until Monday. And whilst I acknowledge your apology in
respect of, for example, we need to put more information in because of the schedule of
meetings etc. Can I suggest, given that we're going to be abolished in two years time and
and wherever it replaces us, that we look at this again,
look at this budget here obviously,
but that we look at the budget process
and set it in the future,
because if we're gonna be a bollocks, for example,
if this is not two years from now,
we're gonna be in six months time,
we need to know what the new council's gonna be having
and what our council taxpayers are gonna be doing.
Because at the end of the day,
whilst it may appear to be some severe number on the sheets,
these figures and these increases
are affecting real people out there.
And thank you.
Thank you.
Councillor Alan Martin.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:12:24
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr Alan Martin - 1:12:29
Just in terms of do we have enough time to look at the accounts, I'm on the overview
and scrutiny committee and the accounts have been around for a good few weeks.
Yes, the numbers have changed a little bit but I think it's a pretty paltry excuse if
you don't come to this meeting prepared and ready to comment on it.
I think that's pathetic.
Anyway, happy news.
When I voted against the budget last year,
my concern was that we were making cuts to council budgets
and increasing council tax and other charges
at a time of high inflation.
The price increases and cuts were bigger in my mind
than they needed to be, given the reserves
that the council holds.
We debated that last year.
Councillor Prater often makes the point that the last administration did use reserves in
previous years to balance the budget and that he doesn't intend to do so.
But it's worth pointing out that these reserves were built up by the previous administration
and exist on behalf of the residents in Fodson and Hive to weather storms when they arise
and in my mind last year was a missed opportunity.
This year's a bit different.
This year we're faced with the end of the council
and in the future our reserves, assets, liabilities
will be merged with a new unitary structure
or within a new unitary structure.
Of course we must manage our council
as sort of business as usual,
but it should be in our minds that our assets
and reserves exist for the people of Folsom and Hyde
at least today and our strong financial position
exists because of the decisions we collectively have made over the last few years.
We owe it to them to make sure that none of this hard work is lost.
My question therefore with the Budget is whether we are doing a slight injustice to our residents
by not seeking to achieve more or cut less with this Budget.
I also think we need to have a more honest conversation around assets such as Princess
parade.
Without getting into the details of a deeply -fought topic,
much of the conversation happening before I was even
a member, the fact remains we were
about to enter a merger with other councils, where
presumably we benefit from presenting ourselves
in the best possible light.
Aside from the fact that the council has been holding
an open consultation that will consider all the options
for Princess Parade, why have we already
re -categorized this land as amenity land
and suffered a 17 .2 million pound write down in its value.
With the government rightly focused on brownfield sites
for economic development and housing at a national level,
it is difficult to see how a newly formed unitary council
will not look at sites such as Princess Parade
in a very different way to others in this chamber,
taking account of the economic benefit to the wider area
and not just those in the immediate vicinity.
Thank you.
Do we have any, oh, Tony Hills, Councillor Tony Hills, sorry.
Councillor Tony Hills - 1:15:43
Thank you, I must say a lot of work's got into this.
And if anybody's worse than Councillor Wilbur,
the thing is it'd be me.
So I don't tend to go into depth like that.
I do know a bit more about what's coming down the track.
and it does worry me.
I was at a meeting recently of the regional committee
for coastal defence,
and the budgets are being, shall we say, leaned on.
They're very tight at the moment,
and going forward, we are going to have
more and more challenges.
I noticed for coastal protection to Gregstone Dunes
on page 81, number three,
It's been approved for £60 ,000, which is fine.
But going on from that, I can't see it getting less.
As the weather gets more extreme, we are going to have more problems.
One of the things I'm looking forward to is a unitary council.
It'll be a very long coastline.
And with a bit of luck, working with Canterbury,
who has some very good engineers, will be OK.
But we do need a plan ahead, so be aware of that.
It's no problem.
I think Councillor Praes has done an awful lot of work on this.
Because of some discrepancies, I won't be voting for it, but I'll be abstaining.
But I do appreciate the amount of work that has gone into this
from our officers and members, so thank you.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:17:10
Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to speak?
Councillor Walker.
Cllr Belinda Walker - 1:17:16
Yes, I feel like snatching the crown from Councillor's Womblin Hills
and comes to finances.
That aside, I want to echo how hard everybody's worked
and thank Tim for his presentation of this.
There's just one thing that's slightly niggling me.
We're talking about a below inflation rise, 2 .99%.
It is a below inflation rise, but when it was set,
I believe inflation was 2 .7%,
so it wasn't actually set as a more accident by design
that it actually is below inflation.
I just wanted to point that out.
Thank you.
And is there anybody else who would like to speak?
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:17:56
So I think there's been a lot of questions, and I'm happy to allow Councillor Prater to
have the right of reply.
I don't think it's strictly in the rules, but I think we will allow him to answer some
of those questions, because that would be helpful to our members to understand where
some of these numbers have come from.
So thank you.
Cllr Tim Prater - 1:18:19
So you'd like me to answer that line in five minutes summation. Right, we'll give this
a shot, but this is going to take a moment. Adrian, thanks for your thanks to officers,
and I understand your point on closing on principle. I'd just like to say I didn't betray
you mate, but you know. But that's where we go. Jenny, yes, 2 .99 % council tax rise. That
is, council tax is lower than many of the other portions of the council tax that will
be made up, so lower than the county council's rate will be, and also things like the police
and crime commissioner, etc. 75p a month is the increase in our percentage of the council
tax on abandoned derides, so that's 75p a month increase. And I think we should also
think about town and parishes, because that's set within this as well. The average increase
that town and parishes have put up there is about 3 .1 % across the piece as well. So also
showing have more restraint and they're not capped so they don't have to pick 2 .99 % but
have and well done to all of those who have sat on the terms and parishes through their
budget meetings in terms of showing that restraint and as you say protecting council to take
the pairs against the increasing costs.
You'll be, David, you'll be delighted to know we've got a full time capital accountant who's
been recruited to help support the budget in order to get more certainty around our
capital budgets going forward, because yeah, they slip a lot, and we're trying to make
sure that happens a lot less. Borrowing £23 million for a leisure centre, it's in the
MTFS, it's not a pledge, it allows for that money net. We will only spend that money on
it if this council agrees that we should do that thing. So there would be a lot of detail
around that, there'd be a lot of discussion of sites and what the facility would look
like and what sort of knowledge to say the type, but no, we don't have 23 million quid
right now. It's two years down the track, in fact I think it's in the MTFS in a period
that we're no longer meant to be here. So it'll be quite difficult for me to borrow
for that at the moment. Also, you'll appoint a £17 .7 million write -off on the value of
that land. The last ban contract in order to remediate the land came in at 45 million
quid, of which 20 million pounds was remediation. The value of the land actually, after you'd
sold it then was zero. That's why it's been written down.
Laura, community grants. You're quite right. CAB have gone online to online and phone services
and that's what that grant is now going to do, to make sure that those people, and it's
something like 94 or 95 % of people across the East Kent area, were using CAB online
and by phone rather than going into offices. They've amalgamated those services so they
are offering unique click online and phone now and the grant funding continues in order
to support people getting that support that way.
They can't walk into an office, but they can pick up the phone and get help from people.
There's, and I can reassure you that there is no provision in this Budget to increase
the allowance Budget to retain cabinet members.
We'll see how that plays out in the next two months, but there is no money in the Budget
to do that, because we haven't had much from the Minister, so at this moment the Council's
position has not yet changed.
Stephen, absolutely, your climate change reserve is a lot smaller,
actually it's a lot smaller as of our cabinet meeting two weeks ago
than it was before, and only for one would like to re -establish that budget
and add back to it if we can prudently do so.
But we've set up the financial stability reserve because this is not a
Council and protect the residents of this area first.
And I sincerely hope there'll be plenty of change from that
in order to support those aspirations
that the climate change budget was created with.
But I can't promise where we are at the moment.
Jackie, I'm sure the directors of opportunity
that are in this room would confirm
that the growth of the value of that business,
although the money has gone into it,
there's been huge growth in what actually the properties are
worth in there.
And it is returning money.
It is now in a place where it is going
to be returning money to this council.
Linda, yes, you're right.
The council tax, the council tax rise, the stage we started writing this, the inflation
level was less than 3%, but on the other hand this rise doesn't take effect until the 1st
of April, 2025, whereby it will probably have gone up by more by then anyway.
So you deal with the fact, with the numbers that you have at the moment that you're dealing
with them.
So that's where we're to.
Little bit back onto something that I wrote,
as opposed to dealing with those points.
I apologise if I didn't deal with your point correctly.
This is Lydia's last meeting as our Section 151 officer.
And I'd like to thank her for everything
that she has done for this council and our Section 151
officer.
She ain't going anywhere just yet,
but she is changing hat and may not
have to sit in front of this meeting in the future. Instead we've got Alan who is joining
us and has joined us from Sevenoaks this evening, stepping into those shoes in the course of
Ambitia's section 151 comment on this budget is in the report in front of you and it says
that the council has found itself in a fortunate position that is in a position to approve
a balanced budget with minimal use of specific reserves unlike many other authorities and
continues to have a reasonable level of reserves.
I think we should be proud of that.
I think the point that I'd like to make on how we got here is that this is the first
budget settlement in this government cycle.
When this government...
Can we finish soon?
You're running out of time.
I've been ready to in five minutes.
You have, yes.
Wow, that was a lot of answers in that.
In that case, thank you very much for your input in this debate.
Please, if you can, do vote for this budget.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:24:16
Thank you, and thank you to Lydia as well for all your hard work.
So this needs to be a recorded vote this evening because it's a budget, so Gemma will lead then.
Councillor Mike Blakemore.
For.
Ms Jemma West - 1:24:30
Councillor Polly Blakemore.
For.
Councillor Butcher.
For.
Councillor Cooper.
Abstain.
Councillor Davidson.
Abstain.
Councillor Fuller.
For.
4. Councillor Godfrey. Abstain. Councillor Holgate. 4. Councillor Mrs Hollingsby. Abstain.
Councillor Hills. Abstain. Councillor Jones. 4. Councillor Keane. Abstain. Councillor Lockwood.
Abstain. Councillor Alan Martin. Abstain. Councillor Elaine Martin. 4. Councillor Jim
Martin. Four. Councillor McConville. Four. Councillor McShane. Abstain.
Councillor Meade. Abstain. Councillor Prater. Four.
Councillor Scoffin. Four. Councillor Shoebe. Four. Councillor Speekman. Four.
Councillor Walker. Abstain. And Councillor Wimble. Four.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:25:56
So we have 14, 4, and 11 abstentions, so that has passed.
Thank you.
So we're going to move on to item 10 of our agenda.
It's an urgent item and it's a review of the political balance and committee membership.

11 Urgent item - REVIEW OF POLITICAL BALANCE AND COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

So we'll need a proposal and a seconder and I think we're looking at one, two, three and
five of the suggestions.
So, Councillor Prater.
Yes, happy to move.
Cllr Tim Prater - 1:26:28
As you say, you're looking at recommendations one, two, three and five of the House of Londonden
that was circulated, made there.
There is no need to elect a new chair of the personnel committee until the committee renews in May.
So I'm moving recommendations one, two, three and five and I hope I got a seconder.
And Councillor Fuller to second. Would you like to speak on this? No? Okay.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:26:52
Would anybody else like to speak on this?
Councillor Wimple.
Thank you chair. I'm just still confused as I'm a member of a
Cllr David Wimble - 1:27:02
political party that
I'm not allowed to go on any of the committees whether it be planning, scrutiny. I'm representing
the electorate of New Romney and yet I'm not allowed to go on any committee other than
one committee that I was elected on without my acknowledgement of whilst I was in hospital
and it just doesn't seem very democratic. Thank you Jenny.
That's the word.
I know you can't change anything, but I think, you know, I did my town and country planning act,
so I've got eight years of experience of that, and yet I'm not allowed to be on the planning committee.
It seems to be everybody when we stood for the council, we've given one, two and three choices,
your first, second and third choice of committee you want to be on.
I'm the only council here who didn't get any of his things, and as I said, he's very democratic.
Would anybody else like to speak on this item?
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:28:00
Councillor Lockwood.
Cllr Nicola Keen - 1:28:02
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:28:04
Cllr Adrian Lockwood - 1:28:07
Could somebody explain for my benefit please why the personnel committee chair isn't under
consideration?
Councillor Prater.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:28:22
Yes, because the same people are remaining on the personnel committee and the personnel
Cllr Tim Prater - 1:28:27
committee elected a chair and until the membership of the committee changes then the chair remains
with the person who was elected as it.
The group which they sit on isn't one of the things that was part of the vote for the chair
and personnel committee.
To Councillor Wimball's point, that's the thing with proportionality is that if you're
one out of 30 you get 1 30th of the seats available and that's what's left.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:28:55
Thank you. So I think we need to vote on this.
So we came to the show of hands.
Those who are full.
I think that's unanimous.
Oh no.
No, it wasn't. Sorry.
Sorry, can we have our hands up again please?
Apologies.
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:29:32
Cllr Anita Jones - 1:29:41
Thank you everyone for this evening and that's the end of the meeting.
Have a good evening.