Finance and Governance Cabinet Advisory Board - Tuesday 10 October 2023, 6:30pm - Tunbridge Wells Borough Council Webcasting

Finance and Governance Cabinet Advisory Board
Tuesday, 10th October 2023 at 6:30pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Seat 3
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Seat 3 - 0:00:00
good evening. I'm Councillor, Christopher Hood, chair of the finance and governance Cabinet Advisory Board, welcome to this evening's meeting. Before we start, there are a number of procedural issues to go through, for which I be very grateful for your attention. I will now pass over to the clock, Caroline Britt. Thank you good evening everybody. In the event of the fire alarm ringing continuously, he must immediately evacuate the building at walking pace officers will directly via the most direct available route, and no one is to use the lift
we will make our way to the fire assembly point by the interest to the Town Hall Yard car park, on Wilson Way, once outside a check will be made to ensure everyone has safely left and no one is to re-enter the building until advised it is safe to do so. This is a public meeting and proceedings are being webcast live online. A recording will also be available for playback on the Council's website shortly afterwards. Can I remind everyone to use the microphones when speaking the red light indicates that the microphone is on
any comments that are not recorded for the webcast will not be included in the minutes of the meeting. It is very important that the outcomes of the meeting are clear. At the end of each substantive item, the Chairman will ask whether the matter is agreed in the absence of a clear majority or if the Chairman decides a full, virtuous desirable. A vote will be taken by a show of hands. Members should raise their hand to indicate their vote when called and keep their hand up until the count has been announced. Members requesting a recorded vote must do so before the vote is taken. Thank you Chair.
thank you very much for the benefit of the recording we're going to take a roll call, the clock will call your name and if you are present, please introduce yourself thanks, thank you Chair Councillor dwellings.
present Councillor Ellis present, thank you Councillor, good ship present, thank you, Councillor McMillan, present, thank you Councillor, thank you present. Thank you, Councillor Hall present, thank you Exe officers this evening and Lee Collier present. Thank you. Zoe Kent present thank you and Peter Benfield at present, thank you. Thank you Chair
thank you very much.
so members of the Committee should be familiar with the process, but for the benefit of any members of the public who may be watching. I'd like to explain a couple of things. Committee members have had their agendas for over a week and have had the opportunity to ask any factual questions of the officers ahead of the meeting. When we come to the substantive items on the agenda this evening, members or members of the public who have registered to speak will be asked to read their statements. They will have a maximum of three minutes. Each. The relevant officer will then set out their report. We will then move into member discussion at the end of the discussion. I will remind Members that without prejudice to any other comments that may be raised, the Committee is asked to come to one of the following positions, number 1, that the recommendations to Cabinet are supported by the Committee number 2, that the recommendations to Cabinet would be supported, subject to a particular issue being addressed or three, that the recommendations to Cabinet are not supported and if this is the case reasons should be stated,

1 Apologies

so that being said on to the agenda item 1, his apologies for absence, do we have any apologies, thank you, Chair, we have received apologies from Councillors, Frances Osborne and Knight.

2 Declarations of Interests

thank you, item 2 is declarations of interests, do any Members have any declarations of interest to make?

3 Notification of Persons Wishing to Speak

4 Minutes of the meeting dated 5 September 2023

I don't see any so we'll move on to Item 3, which is notification of visiting persons wishing to speak, I don't think there are any Carolyn No, so there are no no persons wishing to speak will move on to four minutes of the meeting our last meeting dated 5th of September.
are there any amendments to the minutes from anybody?
now doesn't look like it, so in that case.
are we agreed members grade OK the motion is carried.

5 Forward Plan as at 27 September 2023

item 5 is the Forward Plan as of 27th of September.
do Members have any comments on the Forward Plan?
I don't think so, no OK in that case.
are we agreed to pass the forward plan?
agree, grade motions carried.
Item number 6, which is the budget update report for 2024 2025, the presenting officer this evening for the report, is Lee Collier, Director of Finance Policy and Development.
on the handover to lie to introduce it. Thank you. Thank you Chairman. This is the second report in the process of setting the 24 25 budget. The budget deficit for next year is currently projected to still be 900,000 pounds. However, this reduces to 300,000 if the updated savings plan is fully implemented, but there are risks that have yet to be quantified, including the 11 new homes. Bonus planning applications are now declining and contractors and suppliers are looking to put up their costs. Projections in this report or a high level forecast using the current year's base budget. A clearer picture will be available next month when the detailed estimates from service managers have been entered into our financial management system, and also at that point we will have the Quarter 2 position for the current year. Whilst there is no news on local finance settlement, the government's Autumn Statement is now scheduled for the 22 of November. High inflationary pressures continue across the economy and particularly on contracts and energy costs, which are now rising again, but the Council was limited to only being able to increase council tax by 3%, which further widens the gap between the cost of providing services and the income it is able to receive. No organisation can absorb these levels inflationary pressures and continue to cover its operating costs. We have previously discussed why this Council does not include business rate growth income within its base budget
turning to the latest forecast share, business rate growth shown in the graph at PA 2.1 for this approach appears to be correct. With this Borough forecast to have the lowest level of business rate growth in the Kent Pool and had this been included within our base budget would be we now facing a further 1 million pounds additional budget gap to fund. A wider concern is that for next year there are no new major business construction schemes likely to come to completion next year either. So when combined with exposure to revaluation refunds, this reaffirms the prudent approach of not banking on business rate growth. Apart from the first 500,000 pounds which we will use to fund the capital programme
locally, the Council continues to experienced staff shortages across our services and staff turnover remains high, and this is not helped by neighbouring council lows. In addition to market supplements for some professional services, the budget setting approach will now be the subject of an Overview and Scrutiny meeting on the 27th of November, and the draft budget will then be subject to four weeks of public consultation before a final report goes through the formal decision-making process in January and February for approval by full Council. Happy to take any questions, Chairman,
thank you very much Les.
do Members have any questions for me?
Tom, do you have a question, looked like you were about to ask them, I was thinking about where he'd come in, but I think I'll wait until we discuss in discussion as fine any any questions or remember satisfied.
had the opportunity to ask questions already seems so, and so move onto discussion, then.
Q. Tom
well, it's only to to express a sort of general frustration that
there in the autumn of 2021 we were talking about co-working arrangements in the Town Hall.
we agreed at Full Council in December 2021, I think there was every expectation, this would happen in the course of perhaps the early part of 2022, and here we are and it's a main item in a savings programme, I just find it disappointing.
noted.
thanks Tom.
any other discussion points anyone would like to raise.
no, I don't think so, so in that case, I think we should just move to.
of sorry, do you want to come in just whilst it's just coming coming back to Tom, I think that's been out of the council's hands and we've been told, and many many times in my in these walls, that it's been to do with the contractor rather than ourselves just the last worth noting as well, yeah absolutely,
point taken.
I think we're virtually there now so.
that may be the case in the last six months, but in the six months there are six months of 2021.
town square were very, very keen to get on with this just as soon as possible.
I think is because of delays at this end, but they have decided that they were going to concentrate on or on other projects, so I mean I don't think it's then I think that's a fair comment, would you care to elaborate on any evidence you have that there were delays a defender I'm not aware of any
I think that the delays at this end were caused by staff turnover in the property department, OK, that's well known.
OK alright.
any further.
debating points from anyone now, okay, in that case, let's move on to.
do the recommendations, so the recommendations to go forward to Cabinet, or are the officers continued to work towards reducing the projected budget deficit, in line with the budget strategy and report back in December, with draft proposals to public consultation Members are we agree?

7 *Council Tax Reduction Scheme 2024/25

the motion is carried, thank you very much, the next item is the council tax reduction scheme and I am pleased we have a presenting officer Zoe Kent here this evening and who is interim head of Mid, conserve revenue, sorry, let me start that again interim head of Mid Kent revenues and benefits partnership a little bit of a mouthful to get out, but thank you very much sorry over to you.
thank you, the council tax reduction scheme change to abandoned scheme in April 2021, this has meant that working age claimants now have less changes to the amount of council tax they have to pay as only earnings are taken into account and anyone not working receives the maximum amount of has the support of 80%. This brings a saving to the council because less adjustments and reminder notices should be issued. The bandage scheme is now in its third year because of the cost of living crisis. We are not recommending any major changes to the scheme,
those on low incomes that receive state benefits are receiving additional cost of living payments to make the scheme more generous would be a burden on the council and the council tax payers of Tunbridge Wells.
in one point, for the cost of the schemes scheme have increased compared with previous years, the caseload has actually dropped by 10% compared with 22 23 this change shows that less people are now working or earning less, so requiring more support, it also takes into account the council tax percentage increase
the minimum amount that working age claimants have to pay at 20% is comparable with most districts in Kent.
to ensure that claimants stay in the same band and their support isn't reduced, we are recommending that the grid amounts in table 1 are increased by the GWP annual uprating percentage welcome any questions, thank you very much, sorry, do Members have any questions Mark?
thank you.
you said most Councillor Ken's, over 80% of any that you do hold on that.
yes, there are councils in the east of Kent that are rewarding a high amount.
don't follow that, I think you have just to grit, could pull it up and that slight thing, obviously there will need to have multiple levels of a local authority government thinks it can be quite complicated, how to actually work out these schemes of things, how does KCC engage with these councils when they do in a high level of the up to 100% to try and reduce that right?
nobody who awards up to 100% 90% is the highest award in Kent, and so we receive an administration grant from the county and while the major preceptors towards the cost of managing the scheme, if we were to award a higher amount, there'd be likely to remove that administration costs so that would be a cost to us other authorities might be bearing that cost and and deciding to award a high percentage.
is answering a question mark.
Matthew did you want to come in on this point?
thank you.
just kind of following on from when Mob left Offleyhay, actually the what is the cost of burden, if we were to do a higher rate, so, for example, if we were to, if we were to go to 85% 90% 95 and 100 what would be the rates, what would be the cost to this Council?
so if we went up by 5%, the cost of this Council would be around, the total cost would be around 180,000 said just to this Council, No, sir, to everybody, to KCC police and for all costs would be 10% year so 18,000 but if we lost the grant then it would be another 150,000 pounds on top of that.
OK just to clarify the the grant.
just as a bit of background on the ground is the the grant we receive to administer the council tax reduction scheme at the level we've currently got, as that is not right just to clarify that's correct and we may also more by Mainstone for the running of the service if the the scheme was changed.
the back of the Murphy's, thank you, so those are the figures that the 180 K for the first 5%, so that's the cost that would be applied to each preceptor is that what you're saying, or that's the total, in total, so.
so what you're saying is if, if there was a magic pot of money under this table here?
denied 180 kuna, I could give everyone the another 5%.
if you had 18,000 you could give everyone 5%, you would have to get agreement from KCC police and fire, but they were happy because we we'd, have to consult with them about increasing the support for our scheme, so we'd have to get feedback from from them, what is our decision, it's not their decision but it may be that they would remove the the administration grant that they provide to the council for managing the scheme and collecting it for collecting council tax.
the thank you I yeah, I'm I do I'm there, but the the next question is what would it cost to this Council to cover that?
if we were to do it on our own and just give them so that if we would give that 5% and then the way up to 100, what would that cost us without affecting any other agencies, it has to affect the other agencies because we collect on their behalf we we can't decide to award an extra 5% and we
the whole of that cost that can't happen, because we are collecting council tax for everybody, we you can have discretionary schemes, and that costs can fall on Tunbridge Wells, but the actual council tax support scheme has is collected on behalf of its reduction in everybody's tax base.
OK, thank you, I'm I'm I was looking for a more general answer, have actually what is the total cost, if we were to discounter that if we were to fund it, what is the actual physical cost of it, but how much is it 190,000 OK, thank you.
does not answer the question for the remain, or remain ning discounts, that you were asking about originally, which was if we were to go beyond 5%, is that all you wanted to know, or did you want to know all of all the way to 0 I yeah I mean I would? I think we do need to have all the facts and figures in front of us to go from 85 1995 and 100% what those costs would be borne
yeah, I'm not sure because I'll be answered in a written responses, and I think that's that's a very good idea, of course, but that was your original point, so that's why I'm coming back to our sense that you wanted the answer to yeah yeah, all of them that'd be great. Thank you. I don't know if that's possible to provide that to this this committee. Thank you. Thanks thanks very thankfully, does anyone else have any questions any other members
don't think so so.
matters open for discussion, do members want to debate this?
now it's just just to say, Chris, that you know I fully understand what the scheme is about how it works.
the fact that
a very small percentage less than 10% is is is income for this Council, 90 plus per cent is income for Kent County Council and the other preceptors.
and the scheme came in in wide consultation with the other boroughs and districts in Kent, I think it's a very fair scheme, it's always been opposed by the Labour Group who, who felt that there ought to be more funding for for for for for four sub in a council tax support.
Amin anvils extensive discussion with the other districts and boroughs, and if that isn't being entered into, then this scheme is or should be should be supported.
OK, thank you so.
any other comments people would like to make in discussion, Matthew hope to thank you, yeah, I, I agree with everything Tom sang, except that I just don't think we have the data in front of us to make those decisions because we're always told that we may lose this grant funding or it may cost us this, I've never actually ever seen it in black and why this is what it's gonna cost. We have asked this question. This is what that's going to cost, and I think
particularly in Tunbridge Wells, where we're all seen as being very well off at fact, actually, that means, if you're not very well-off around here, it really really hurts because it is very expensive to live Rameau yeah, particularly I'm thinking of my member over there,
I just think we could be doing more, and with the data in front of us we could, we would wish need to look at it, we need to look at it further, instead of just kind of accepting it may cost us this, I can't accept that as a very good answer, I need to know it will cost this, it will cost that there needs to be in black and white former.
and I'd like to make a and a third recommendation, if possible, Mr Chair, that the Cabinet for the Cabinet asked for it to be fully costed out there, so the Cabinet fully costs out the financial impacts to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council at a full range of CTS schemes.
I don't want to obviously use this committee to go further than that, but I'd like to see it in black and white please.
I think that's a fair request, yeah I'm happy with that to include that in the recommendations, as itineraries might not it's just you, we want more data, you think the members should be more fully informed, I think that's perfectly reasonable I'm happy to add that in Karen yes we do like Councillor thank you just do to read out his his recommendation.
thank you, so that Cabinet fully cost out the financial impacts to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council of a full range of CTS schemes.
then we then, so we can, we can add that one to the recommendations does that mean I need to add that into the recommendations when I read them out or not, so or can I refer to you for that bit and then we'll we'll say are we agreed at that point so I just leave that there.
that's brilliant, thank you, OK, that's fine or any further.
items to discuss or points you want to make before we go to.
the recommendations I'm not seeing any further comments so yeah, let's move on to the recommendations which are number 1, that Cabinet notes the progress of the income banded council tax reduction scheme to the Cabinet recommends that no changes are made to the Council Tax reduction scheme for 2024 25 except for a percentage increase to the income bands in line with the dw p annual percentage uprating increase and third,
that Cabinet fully costed out the financial impact to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council of a full range of council tax reduction schemes, so Members are we agreed a great OK, thank you very much.

8 Disposal of Surplus Land at Mount Pleasant Car Park

which brings us to the next item, which is the disposal of land at Mount Pleasant car park.
Peter Benfield senior Estates Officer will introduce this report before I pass over to him at first like to note that this item contains an exempt appendix which is set out in the restricted papers until agenda item 11. The report may be discussed and decided upon in public session, provided that no exempt information is disclosed and Members are happy to take the exempt information as read. Alternatively, if Members wish to discuss anything which appears in the exempt appendix please indicate during the discussion the decision will then be held over and discussing it in a private session later so
first and foremost, I think on handover to Peter and then we'll we'll have questions.
thank you very much, good evening.
has advised him presenting a report on the proposed St Hill disposal of the Mount Pleasant car park.
set behind the AXA, building on the former exibility, the site is already listed in the asset management plan, as has surplus to requirements with a
expectation over a plan to dispose of the site it is currently producing a.
an income for the for the council through a a lease for four parking, but this income can be readily transferred elsewhere.
as perhaps to the Crescent Road car park, so that income stream can be maintained for the foreseeable future, a disposal will, though provider has an opportunity to provide a substantial capital receipt to the Council, the site is currently on the market with with our chosen agents and and it is in our intention to keep the the marketing open for until the end of to the end of the month with the aim of crystallising the interest that has been that our agents are ha ha gaining from from their marketing programme.
at the at that stage, then, there will be further discussion as to make a final decision as to the preferred preferred bidder preferred bidder.
understandably, there are no, as perhaps was alluded in in Leeds to the report earlier that there is that the terms of developments for the schemes that the market is is clearly still quite difficult at the moment with the two issues of of uncertainty over interest rates, so it would have to say we have to bear that in mind, but it is certainly our recommendation that we continue the process to sell that survey to sell the site for development purposes to realise the
a capital receipt for the for the Council, thank you.
thank you very much, Peter.
do Members have any questions,
don't see any questions so.
councillors, who are there any questions?
now, okay.
yeah
can I ask how many agents with it, there's a property put up with how many agents who use the lines?
it was not just with its smoke with one agent.
Lambert Smith Hampton.
well, the the principal reasons that the ewes are already involved with marketing the there was the retained agents for for AXA for the disposal of their site, as the two sites are essentially joined it, would it's it's the pertinent plan to sort of piggyback off their their work that they've done on the on the on disposal of the Vox ability?
can I ask, do we know how many Emily how many potential interest we've had so far?
I remember that, as I understand, at the moment there is just one firm offer, but the agents are speaking to, you know, there was a lot of interest expressed, but it's just a matter of sort of crystallising those there's those interested to firm or firm offers which is the intention to keep the process open to the end of the month.
to that extent, can I ask, why are we if we recognise and what was difficult about it, and we had the asset for add, and how can we have the SDLT ahead and we've got to get a footprint for a number of years definitely voiced it were? Why are we in such a rush to sell it right now? Why don't we wait for a better opportunity when possibly the products that the marketplace is better, because if we only asset and it's not, it's not costing us any money, why don't we hold onto the asset to maximise its value?
I think that is, I think that is still an option, and I think that it is a fair point and I think that will study something that we can address and sort of at the end of the marketing marketing period, I think if it's if it's true to deem that any offers are not representing representative of our expectations then that that is something that we have to bear and bear in mind and see me go to.
consider that we are getting fair value and full value for the site.
but to find that out we have to have it on the market to to assess how strong the market is
and that in time will tell on that as it stands.
we are purely marketing it to to attract up to to attract bids, and you know the the market will decide if that, if that, if the if the offers of the bids are
appropriate,
yeah, I know and ultimately we will decide whether to dispose of it or not, and if we decide not to we, we don't have to wait again.
it rests with me as the portfolio holder.
I bet with you, you you.
sorry, Mr sorry, Chairman, you'll make the decision whether you think it's fair value or not, in collaboration with with senior officers as well, no, it won't be entirely my decision, I will take advice from senior officers and the decision would be made on that basis, but also I think I believe it goes through the normal.
process of going on the Forward Plan and a final decision, I think, has been made by cabinet so identically. You're able to confirm that that formally, if we did accept an offer, would still be a process to for Cabinet, to approve, approve that it wouldn't be solely delegated to us, or would it be suddenly delegated to us? I think that's what you want to find out the the. The recommendation that are the important one is recommendation number 2 that delegated authority is granted to the Head of economic development and property, in consultation with Director Finance Policy and Development, the monitoring officer and the Cabinet Member for Finance and performance to negotiate and agree terms of the disposal, so this report is seeking delegated authority to complete that that whole process had, ultimately the decision would be portfolio holder and senior officers.
that is the answers your question, hopefully from this point onwards from this recommendation.
as we make that recommendation.
correct.
Matthew, you like a question, what does PEP perhaps have to do with this, then does it not come back to them?
so it's already been to the property asset oversight panel, not sure if everyone is familiar with the acronym, but yes, so it has been discussed at that level and you know, a recommendation has been made which, by the by the panel which pretty much matches exactly the recommendations that are before you here from the from the Committee.
there has been there first, and then the recommendation from the panel is that that we'd look to dispose of the asset and
and so yeah, the panel is an agreement with the recommendation here this evening.
I was under the impression, maybe I am mistaken, that actually the that we were going to follow this process, but at the end, if we weren't happy with where we are with.
where this was going, I'm trying to make sure we stay within the
the the unrestricted by this, that it would come back to p a p per hour, I mean, maybe that's my mistake.
I don't think it would to decide whether we are happy to accept that price or not, but I'm happy to be corrected if I am wrong, so that there's no need for.
this report to go back any further, so Full Council approved this surface car park is surplus to requirements.
officers have gone through the process of considering the market, and the market is not just the current property market, it's also important to bear in mind this is adjacent to a major development site in itself.
that could alter the price that could be achieved at this point in time, this was discussed with the property asset oversight panel, which recommended that they were satisfied that this report, that's Britain here, can come forward, and this report seeks for delegation to go to seal beds officers, will review those CIL bids in consultation with the portfolio holder and make a recommendation.
to the portfolio holder or whether or not to accept a particular offer. That's that's been submitted if an offer is is deemed suitable by professional advice and it is agreed by the portfolio holder, then therefore delegation exists to complete the formalities for the disposal
thankfully have claimed that.
yeah yeah, so thank you always ensure that I could could anything I just wanted to do to reiterate what Sidley was saying about the adjacent site, because it does present or presents an opportunity for for this site in terms of in terms of disposal because it perhaps looking at you know it's it's not a a joint venture, the two separate sites but,
the fact that there is sort of one one site that site that is currently on the market opens up the opportunity for the perhaps more for the Finn for this site as well, if they are sort of sold separately or this this site is deferred for a year and the other the other site is is progressing then it may have some impact,
on on on the potential for for our own, for our own land, for the disposal of our own land. Sorry, that is a initially to be to bear in mind
thank you, Peter, that's a very useful intervention as well.
any further questions to
the way for the discussion okay.
I hope that clears that up about the decision making process.
since members are somewhat concerned that the Council might sell the asset for a lower price than
then we will come to it but yeah, so maybe maybe we can discuss that in the discussion or a handy now there seemed to be some concerns expressed about awesome fears that we might might dispose of the asset less than might potentially be be worth, but it's just to clarify again that you know it's not a decision taken in isolation and certainly consult with my Cabinet colleagues on it as well before disposal and all the senior officers and get the best possible advice at that time.
but ultimately we don't have to sell if we believe that we haven't extracted the maximum value we can promise so.
I can't say much more than that really, but let's go into discussion clearly that's where we're heading next, would you like to sort of staff the
package ship yeah, I guess I have a somewhat concern would be aware because I I hear about we've got the officers, we've got yourself and with, and then we've got, and we've got an advisor on the asset selling agent.
what a setting agent is isn't isn't Lisa, isn't our adviser very busy, because effectively he's he's he they are incentivised so that, whatever whatever offer comes, I am begging to be is especially missing marketplace negative incentives to encourage us to sell,
so what might like it might be my concern is if we we don't really have what I would call an independent mark expert looking at this we have the experience of our officers, which is which is that it is of a high quality and we have yourself for that Michelle anyhow, but your property expertise is like,
but the somewhat seems to me that we would need to be sensible to have someone from.
who isn't the agent also saying to us?
possibly they know that that looks at that looks like a fair market price just give ourselves some sort of extra layers of.
of
clarity and especially with delegating the decision out to two officers in yourself, I think it's events to have an independent or someone else outside of selling ajor, advising or putting their comments on that, I think, would be yourself of use.
yeah, I think I agree with you.
I mean, it has come up in discussion before and yeah, I do believe we have obtained an independent valuation, we have our own view of what we should, we think we realistically should be getting for that side.
so I think we do have an idea of what we we should be getting as a as a benchmark for when we get the seal beds and we can review them and decide whether or not that meets our expectation or not, I don't know if that reassures you a little bit.
if the independent valuation come, I'd need to double-check on that and get back to you with, or perhaps a written response, unless leak one.
if I may chairman, so before Council can dispose of any land or assets, it has to say what's called a record valuation, Section 1 2 3, and that is included within the exempt report, so that is already independently established, the potential value and ranges of this particular site that has to be signed off by a professionally qualified valuer by our duty bound by their profession to act independently and give true and for advice and you have that within your exempt papers.
that's different from the agent, then there is a separate company from the Age Well.
yeah, yeah,
let's thank you very much as yeah, that's fine as well, worth exploring that thank you thanks to you.
any other points in discussion now.
thank you Chair, I don't think we should be considering disposal of Councillor in car parks until the Council has won the car park strategy, especially one that addresses EV charging throughout the entire retail spine of Tunbridge Wells selling assets, I think without a comprehensive strategy especially one that hasn't been consulted on is not in the taxpayer's best interests, I would urge the Cabinet to delay this decision until the Council is fully developed and so feedback on our car park strategy, corresponding town centre plan and corporate plan.
thank you OK, thank you, thank you lads.
any further subtle comments anyone wants to make.
in discussion.
I am looking for any further comments, but I don't think.
don't think there are any and Steve you wanna come just one further question, the membership of the chairman, if you can help us, where are we and actually on, had planning only a parking strategy because it seems to be talked about for a long time and I don't know where I I keeps keeps to keep being talked about but we don't seem to have anything for
yeah, I mean the car parking strategy is, is gonna be at a high level overview of how you know what the requirements needs will be for the future, I mean going back any and it is being worked on, but there has been a considerable
amount of work that needs to be progressed sooner, so if we prioritise what needs to be done sooner
I appreciate Members' frustration, they would like like it to come forward faster
it is it will be delivered, but but I don't think we're gonna be there for a number of months, yet Liam Lee may be able to confirm what the current timescale, so I think it's gonna be some time before we get the final document of the car parking strategy to share with you as members.
Leigh, would you like to chip in as to what the current timescales, and I think we're talking about some way of the army, yeah, so that the car parking strategy has a high level strategy that links in with our transport strategy town centre action plan, the local plan that isn't likely to be ready until later on this year, but the car park in question here Mount Pleasant Avenue, is a small surface car park with very little public use. It's not an asset that's key to car parking provision within the town centre, which is what the car parking strategy is looking to address.
yeah, I think I think that's the point. I think this. This is somewhat unique car park to all the other car parks in the Borough it was previously used by the employees of AXA from Monday to Friday. Was it wasn't used by the public at all, was very rarely used, or even known about by the public on on Saturdays when it was open for pay, parking, utilisation was incredibly low. So yes, in a sense, it does sit somewhat outside the the other car parks in the Borough in. In my judgment, it is not really part of the should be included in the overall car parking strategy for which yeah. We do need to include all the other car parks which have high levels of utilisation. This this was somewhat unique and is an exception that that was my judgment
top
yes, Chris, and as a member of the property assets oversight panel, I made the reservations about selling car parks in advance of receiving.
a car park strategy report.
I mean, I think you know.
I think that there have been such from comments, repeating, refusing any suggestions of selling car parks that nothing will be sold in advance of the car park strategy that actually makes their position slightly awkward but.
I accept the position that councils in
yeah, thank you, I mean just just to clarify this, this is a somewhat exceptional and unique car park and we've decided to proceed with disposing of this asset.
other car parks are not being considered for disposal just to make that clear.
Chris, I fully understand that, but there are very, very strong statements of that, this is not going to happen in advance of a letter I say, I understand the awkwardness of the situation.
I appreciate that let's move on any other comments.
in the discussion.
now, okay, alright, it looks like we've concluded the discussion, then thank you very much members, so let's let's move to the recommendations then so somewhat long, but
if Members are satisfied with the report without discussing exempt information, the decision can be made now, so I just need to.
check whether you are ready to move on, you don't want to go into exempt and start to discuss any of the information in that appendix no OK greatly, let's move on, then, to first recommendation is that Cabinet approves the disposal of the land referred to in this report and the appendices that delegated authority is granted to the Head of economic development and property in consultation with the Director of Finance Policy and Development.
the monitoring officer and the Cabinet Member for Finance and performance negotiate and agree the terms of the disposal that the head of Mid Kent legal Services is authorised to negotiate and complete all necessary and ancillary legal documentation and formalities, to give effect to these recommendations and the disposal of the land.
and finally, that the Director of Finance Policy and Development, in consultation with the portfolio holder for finance and performance
be given delegated authority to negotiate and complete all necessary future leases and other formalities as a consequence of this disposal members are we agree.
generally, I am sorry to interrupt your you'll thi at no point in there is there or there is there anything about saying it saying that we are going to there's no point saying that there's no point in any of those recommendations does it say,
to say that we may not wait when or or not it says we are, we are going to give delegated authority to do this, to sell to that or not, there's nowhere or not, in my interpretation of it is it remains open for us to make a decision either way, so there's nothing that I've read out there that I can see this prescriptive that
we definitely will sell this or not.
it is still delegated to myself and the
the senior officer at Lea to discuss that and and make that determination.
you want to add something sorry, I think yeah, thank you Chairman, so just to get this right, as if, if we, when we get the sealed bids, if they are not anywhere near the book value, you you're telling us here that you will decline them and it's difficult to put you on the spot but that's what you're saying yeah yes, I reserve the right to do it.
if I'm reading the ham conversation correctly, maybe recommendation to at the end, it could be a long low rise, provided the Council achieves this meets its best value requirements.
that's great suggestion.
so that's under section 2.
the recommendation to remove the full stop at disposable yeah and the comma provided this satisfies the Council's best value requirements.
yeah
OK, I'm gonna, take it, Members will feel more comfortable with that on.
do you want to add something further Barnes?
J can I ask for a recorded vote on this agenda item, yeah yeah yeah.
yeah just confirming the club here and I mean, are you satisfied I just reread the second recommendation rather than the whole lot again, yeah OK so and then we'll have the vote.
so recommendation 2 now reads that delegated authority is granted to the Head of economic development and property, in consultation with the Director of Finance Policy and procurement, the monitoring officer and the Cabinet Member for Finance and performance negotiate and agree the terms of the disposal provided this satisfies this Council's best value requirement.
so now we go to a vote so.
yeah, let's go home.
Councillor dwellings.
agreed.
Councillor Ellis agreed, thank you Councillor good ship against thank you Councillor McMillan, thank you, Councillor Sankey agreed, thank you, Councillor Hall agreed, thank you Chair, that's five agreed and one again so the motion is carried, thank you very much, Caroline.
so.

9 Urgent Business

10 Date of the Next Meeting

now, integrate your business, is there any edge of business to discuss, I don't believe there is no, and that brings us to final item which date for the next meeting which is scheduled to take place on Tuesday, the 14th of November at 6.30, the meeting is now closed.