Agenda and minutes

The Council observed a minute silence following the death of former Councillor Bob Backhouse.  Bob served as a Councillor for Sherwood from 2010 until May 2022.

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors: Johnson, Lewis, and Neville.

To approve the minutes of the 1^st extraordinary meeting held on 14 December 2022 as a correct record. The only issue relating to the minutes that can be discussed is their accuracy.

No amendments were proposed.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the first extraordinary meeting dated 14 December 2022 be approved as a correct record.

To approve the minutes of the 2nd extraordinary meeting held on 14 December 2022 as a correct record. The only issue relating to the minutes that can be discussed is their accuracy.

Councillor Christopher Hall has asked for the following amendment:

                        RESOLVED –

1.    That FC52/22 be amended to say 64% respondents which replaces the statement 64% electorates.

2.    And the statement £200k savings over 4 year period on all out election be added to the minutes

3.    That, subject to the above amendment, the minutes of the meeting dated 14 December 2022 be approved as a correct record.

To approve the minutes of the ordinary meeting held on 14 December 2022 as a correct record. The only issue relating to the minutes that can be discussed is their accuracy.

No amendments were proposed.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the ordinary meeting dated 14 December 2022 be approved as a correct record.

To receive any declarations of interest by members in items on the agenda. For any advice on declarations of interest; please contact the Monitoring Officer before the meeting.

No declarations of pecuniary or significant other interest were made. 

To receive announcements from the Mayor, the Leader of the Council, members of the Cabinet and the Chief Executive.

The Leader of the Council announced:

• Councillor Pope would be nominated for Deputy Mayor in 2023/24

The Portfolio Holder for Rural Communities: Councillor Warne

• Reminded all that a £100k fund has been created in response to the cost-of-living crisis, charities and similar organisations were invited to apply for funding.
• To date the following grants have issued as of: (31 January 2023)
  • Charlies Angels Kitchen - £15,000
  • Nourish - £20,000
  • Number One Community Trust - £15,000
  • Tunbridge Wells Volunteer bureau - £10,000
  • Parish Larders - £15,000 (£2,500 for each larder)
  • West Kent Mind - £25,000

The Portfolio Holder for Housing and Planning: Councillor Pound

• SE water draft resources management plan and Southern Water management plan, have set out their long-term plan for ensuring that there are sufficient water supplies for the respective areas over the next 50 years
• Thanks were given to the following officers Sharon Evans and Ellen Gilbert for their work in preparing the councils response.
• The Council acknowledges the challenges faced by both companies. It is explicit that it would be unable to meet the level of service customers expect unless there is investment in new schemes, an increase in supply and or a reduction of demand.
• The council provided the following three responses to South-East Water:

• TWBC would welcome further engagement with SE Water in relation to these projects, so the council will continue to work closely with now things water in developing its water resources management plan

The Portfolio Holder Environment, Sustainability and Carbon Reduction: Councillor Everitt

·         I am pleased to say that we are currently going through the processes to allow this Council to join the UK 100.

·         Which is a cross-party local network of those who have pledged to work towards a transition to net zero within local government.

·         Membership of the UK 100 would not only publicly reaffirm our Council's commitment to reducing carbon emissions and pollution, but also allow us to build upon a wealth of experience and expertise of other existing members of the UK 100.

·         Councillor Chapelard, and I met representatives from the UK 100 and we hope to have our request for membership of this sector accepted and an announcement to be made next week.

Announcement by the Chief Executive:

·         Confirmed that Dr Philip Whitbourn has accepted his Freedom of the Borough Award

·         A Civic Ceremony will be held middle of April, more  ...  view the full minutes text for item FC23/22

To receive any questions from members of the public, of which due notice has been given in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 8, to be submitted and answered.

The Mayor advised that four questions from members of the public had been received under Council Procedure Rule 8.

1.    Question from Robert Banks

“The Household Recycling and Waste Collection Service provider (Urbaser) has asked this Council to contribute a maximum of £150,00 towards the early lease termination costs associated with a number of the existing fleet, in order to lease circa forty-four vehicles new vehicles on an 8-year lease which will extend beyond the end of the existing service contract.  If this proposal is accepted, what will the Council's additional annual financial liability be for the initial 4 years, the subsequent 4 years after the existing contract has expired and the estimated cost of converting the vehicles to use biofuel rather than diesel”

Answer from Councillor Everitt

This one-off payment, will allow for the re-rounding and re-fleeting which will enable a more efficient use of resources to meet the changing demands on the service, reducing travel distances, carbon emissions and vehicle down time and improving the stability of the service. I know members in this room will greet that news favourably and our residents equally, given that they have expressed the importance they place on this service in the recent budget response. This payment is one off and there are no additional annual financial liabilities attached to the proposal.

I am also happy to say that forty-four vehicles to be leased would require no further conversion costs to use HVO fuel as opposed from diesel.

Once again thank you for your question.

Supplementary question from Robert Banks

So, I did not catch show of the amount of changing into biofuel, and also I was under the impression that at the present rate we will not be carbon neutral by 2030 and other measures were going to have to be taken.

Supplementary Response from Councillor Everitt

To clarify your question of other vehicles there were no costs and no costs for those new vehicles on the new lease to use HVO in relation to reaching our 2030 commitment to be carbon neutral in the work the Council does we haven't produced a new carbon reduction pathway to 2030 but certainly reaching the 2030 commitment I hold and everyone in the Chamber holds, but to reach that goal, we have to produce a new carbon reduction pathway and that will have to take account of any decisions we make, thank you.

2.    Question from Charlie Keeling

“How much will the preparation of 'Suggested Changes' to the local plan cost – could that be itemised by consultant/other 3rd party, and this is against the backdrop that all Councils currently appear to be very cash-strapped?”

Answer from Councillor Pound

Thank you Mr Keeling for your question.

There are some specific pieces of work are being undertaken such as on the Stage 3 Greenbelt study which is being done by consultants LUC and will be at a cost to the Council of £57,496.00. 

Further work is being undertaken on Master planning,  ...  view the full minutes text for item FC24/22

To receive any questions from members of the Council, of which due notice has been given in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 10, to be submitted and answered.

The Mayor advised that there were three questions from members of the Council had been received under Council Procedure Rule 10.

1.    Question from Councillor McMillan

Please can an explanation be given that a Local Plan that was four years in the making, agreed and permitted the traffic consultant SWACO to submit approximately 40 documents relating to traffic mitigation at Kipping’s Cross to the Inspector during his review without any opportunity for residents and parish councils to review or comment?  Is it because the recommendation of narrowing the B2160 to mitigate all the extra traffic from building large estates in Paddock Wood, Horsmonden and Matfield is so clearly flawed that it would mean the local plan has to and should be properly reviewed?”

Answer from Councillor pound

The Local Plan is a project that has been in production for a number of years and has evolved during this time and was not incomplete at the time of submission to the Secretary of State for Examination.

The Vision of the local plan is to deliver growth in new homes, jobs, and supporting infrastructure that will be achieved over the plan period in a manner that respects the distinctive qualities of the entire borough.

The examination of the local plan is supported with a wide-ranging evidence base some of which is prepared in an iterative way, like transport evidence, which has come forward at different stages of the plan’s preparation.

The indicative mitigation scheme for Kipping’s Cross was brought forward by the council’s consultants Sweco following lengthy discussions and agreement with National Highways and Kent County Council as Highways Authority.

The specific Sweco report you make reference to is supplemental to the most recent Statement of Common Ground between TWBC and National Highways which was submitted at the same time.

It is not uncommon for local authorities to progress their local plans in these ways.

I’ll just quote from the Submission Local Plan’ s supporting Infrastructure Development Plan

2.44 Status of the Infrastructure Development Plan

“As the work progresses on the Local Plan, further discussions will take place with the various infrastructure providers to firm up the requirements, timescales, associated costs, etc. and will be updated if necessary alongside the Examination of the Local Plan during 2021/2022. For the above reasons, this Infrastructure Delivery Plan is termed a ‘Live Document’ as by its nature it requires to be regularly updated to ensure it has the most up to date information and requirements in it to support the growth proposed in the Local Plan.”

At 3.8 the plan states “NH has acknowledged the peak hour congestion issues at the A21/B2160 junction at Kipping’s Cross and also at Flimwell, which impacts back into the borough beyond the junction with the B2079.”

The detail of the Sweco report relating to Kipping’s Cross was put forward to the Inspector and the Council acknowledged that there had not been time to consult on the detail. This is now with the Inspector for review, and he  ...  view the full minutes text for item FC25/22

To consider and, if thought fit, to approve the recommendations set out in the associated report.

Councillor Chapelard moved, and Councillor Warne seconded, the recommendation set out in the associated report.

Councillor Chapelard advised:

·         The Plan will carry the administration into 2022/24

·         The plan makes clear the administrations priorities – Focus on Five

·         Advised the name of the plan has been changed to reflect input from Councillors and will now be known as The Tunbridge Wells Borough Council’s Plan.

·         Confirmed that further detail would be made available via web site following consultation and will feed into the Strategic Plan.

Debate included:

• The report is nothing strategic it is nothing more than a political pamphlet
• What has been proposed was built around the previous administration and the borough partnership has nothing new to add
• The coalition rejected cost saving of £200,000 by rejecting all out elections and ignored what the local Parishes wanted.
• Doubling the size of the Cabinet will nor please some residents
• Building vibrant and safer towns, by putting up a few cameras in car parks does nothing for public safety.
• The BP are just duplicating other people’s efforts.
• The Plan needs to have more recognition to the Heritage which is found in the borough
• Tunbridge Wells and much of the rural areas have many grade one listed buildings as well as many protected landscapes and this needs to be adopted within the plan.
• It was highlighted that the report was intended to be a short to medium term report
• Although Heritage is recognised in many areas of the report it perhaps needs one specific area to be made clearer.
• The administration had hoped other parties would provide positive feedback to feed into the report rather than just provide negative statements.
• The lack of detail will be addressed and applied within the 2023 plan

The Mayor took a recorded vote.

Members who voted for the Motion: Councillors Atkins, Britcher-Allen, Barras, Brice, Chapelard, Ellis, Everitt, Fitzsimmons, Funnel, Hayward, (Christopher) Hall, (Linda) Hall, Hickey Hill, Knight, Le Page, Lidstone, McMillan, Moon, Morton, Patterson, Pope, Poile, Pound, Rands, Rogers, Rutland, Sankey, Wakeman, Warne, Wormington, Willis.(32)

Members who voted against the Motion: Councillors: Allen, Attwood, Barrington-King, Bland, Dawlings, Fairweather, Goodship, Holden, March, (Ms) Palmer, Roberts, White (12)

Members who abstained from voting: Councillor Bailey (1)

Councillor Holden requested a recorded vote:

To consider and, if thought fit, to approve the recommendations set out in the associated report.

The Mayor exercised his discretion under Council Procedures Rule 13.4.4 to allow leaders of each political party more than 10 minutes to speak.

Councillor Hall moved, and Councillor Hayward seconded, the recommendations set out in the report.

Mr Robert Banks had registered to speak, which included the following comments:

·         The draft Budget consultation was presented to the finance and governance CAB earlier this year, Mr Colyer gave a verbal summary of the result, there is no record in the minutes of any discussion relating to this consultation

·         The results were formally presented at subsequent Cabinet meeting, the three main areas where the responded wish to reduce the budget on 11 discretionary services

·         Band D council, Amelia Scott property and development and the Assembly Hall and reallocate the increased funding to recreational and climate change initiatives. Ranked the 3 most important not surprisingly was Rubbish, Recycling and Street Cleaning

·         Public should be used to inform the significant changes to the range of services that can be afforded

Debate on the motion included the following comments:

• Thanks were given to officers who had provided input into the 2023/24 Budget report (Candlin, Colyer, Fineman)
• Thanks, was also shown to Councillor Hickey for laying the groundwork which provided the starting point of the report.
• 2023/24 Budget has been set during turbulent times.
• Income and expenditure are no longer safe and predictable, and new ways of managing finances must be called upon.
• The war in Ukraine, and the immediate impact on energy costs, rampant inflation of over 10%, labour market shortage and erratic and unpredictable revenue support from central government have made the task of running a business challenging.
• Financial year 2022/23 called upon £944k from reserves to bridge the funding gap from the previous administration.
• Previously stated the predicted losses in the Mid Term Financial strategy are concerning and appear to have no viable associated mitigation plan.
• The Borough Partnership made, Safeguarding the Councils Finances is one of the Focus on Five priorities, choosing not to ‘Wait and See.’
• Raising fees and charges including car parking fees, since 2017, was a necessary measure to address the deficit and protect the councils’ services.
• Council delivered a Community Support Fund of £100K of grants to help the neediest, which was delivered in time for winter.
• Additional revenues from car parking charges will raise more revenues in the coming financial year
• Other Council fees and charges for services were uplifted by an average of 5.9% in November.
• After some excellent treasury management by the Finance Team our expected return on Council’s investment led to an additional £750,000 in income.
• Despite this, impact of inflation in the economy has wiped out most of these gains with energy costs to the Council doubling over the financial year to £300k
• Costs to the council of contract indexation and additional payments to maintain statutory services, driven by inflation have equated to £1.29m.
• Revenue support from central government remains sporadic, uncertain, and overly centralised.
• The New Home Bonus is unclear, our contribution  ...  view the full minutes text for item FC27/22

To consider and, if thought fit, to approve the recommendations set out in the associated report.

Councillor Hall moved, and Councillor Chapelard seconded, the recommendations set out in the report.

The report was taken as read.

The Mayor took a recorded vote on the motion in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 15.7.

Members who voted for the Motion: Councillors Allen, Attwood, Atkins ,Barrington-King, Bailey, Britcher-Allen, Barras, Bland Brice, Chapelard, Dawlings, Ellis, Everitt, Fairweather, Fitzsimmons, Funnel, Goodship, Hayward, (Christopher) Hall, Hickey Hill, Knight, Le Page, Lidstone, March, McMillan, Moon, Morton, (Ms) Palmer, Patterson, Pope, Poile, Pound, Rands, Roberts, Rogers, Rutland, Sankey, Wakeman, Warne, White, Wormington, Willis.(43)

Members who abstained from voting: Councillor (Linda) Hall

Members who voted against the Motion:   (0) 

RESOLVED –

That the Council Tax for 2023/24 as set out at Appendix A to the report be approved.

To consider and, if thought fit, to approve the recommendations set out in the associated report.

Councillor Hall moved, and Councillor Chapelard seconded, the recommendations set out in the report.

Mr Jeremy Thompson had registered to speak, which included the following comments:

·         Concern was raised over the fact that the Wesley Centre has been included within TWBC Asset Surplus.

·         Objection was raised at a council meeting on the 9 Feb 2023.

·         Wesley Centre along with its gardens need to be removed from the list this proposal is supported by the Paddock Wood Town Council and four borough councillors and a County Councillor.

·         The Wesley centre is afforded protection through the Paddock Wood Neighbourhood Plan and the local Plan

·         With the proposed new housing planned for Paddock Wood it does not make sense to dispose of the asset.

·         A consultation of over one hundred responses all supported retaining the Wesley Centre

·         A request was made to the Leader of the Council and the Council to commit to the removal of the Wesley Centre from the Asst list.

Debate included:

• Wesley Centre is an important part of Paddock Wood (PW) heritage and is used extensively by various community groups
• The Wesley centre is one of two community spaces run by TWBC
• Given the planned growth of the town it was surprising to see this property on the asset disposal list
• Paddock Wood already losing a large percentage of green space with the proposed new houses and increase in traffic PW are feeling like they are getting a rough deal from TWBC
• Not only are community centres planned for disposal, but the administration is also planning to sell of five town centre car parks which is a drastic move.
• No strategy has been given to the disposal of car parks, surely a car parking strategy should be developed before any thought is given to disposal of them
• Concern was raised over the fact that Parish or Town Councils would be informed of rather than consulted on any decision.
• If the report this evening in its current form is approved you are giving the green light for up to eleven assets to be sold therefore support cannot be given.
• Full Councill needs to see details of the parking strategy and we need to see details of the short and long-term financial implications of any proposed asset sale

Councillor Bailey moved a revised recommendation to read as follows: Full Council approves and adopts the Asset Management Plan for 2023/24 excluding the list of assets deemed surplus in Appendix 4, which was seconded by Councillor Goodship.

Debate on proposed amendment to Appendix 4.

• Councillor Pound disagreed with the amended on the grounds that the asset management plan is a means of identify assets where the benefits of those assets and the benefits that they accrue from their utilisation need to outweigh the ongoing insignificant costs of maintaining them.
• Or they are they are just no longer useful to the council in the provision of its services. It does not necessarily mean that they are being sold, it means that they are being  ...  view the full minutes text for item FC29/22

To consider and, if thought fit, to approve the recommendations set out in the associated report.

Councillor Hall moved, and Councillor Chapelard seconded, the recommendations set out in the report.

The report was taken as read

The Mayor took a vote on the motion by affirmation

RESOLVED – That the Capital Strategy 2023/24, as set out in Appendix A to the report, be adopted.

To consider and, if thought fit, to approve the recommendations set out in the associated report.

Councillor Hall moved, and Councillor Chapelard seconded, the recommendations set out in the report.

The report was taken as read

The Mayor took a vote on the motion by affirmation

RESOLVED - That the Treasury Management Policy and Strategy 2023/24, as set out in Appendix A to the report, be adopted

To consider any other items which the Mayor decides are urgent, for the reasons to be stated, in accordance with Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

There was no urgent business

To authorise the Common Seal of the Council to be affixed to any contract, minute, notice or other document arising out of the minutes, or pursuant to any delegation, authority or power conferred by the Council.

RESOLVED – That the Common Seal of the Council be affixed to any contract, minute, notice or other document arising out of the minutes or pursuant to any delegation, authority or power conferred by the Council.

To note that the date of the next meeting is 5 April 2023

The next scheduled meeting was Wednesday 5 April 2023

NOTES:

The meeting concluded at 10pm

An audio recording of this meeting is available on the Tunbridge Wells Borough Council website