There were no apologies for absence.

The minutes of the meeting held on Monday 4 November were agreed and signed by the Chair.

Cllr Shane Mochrie-Cox declared an interest in the agenda items 18 & 19, regarding Leisure Centre Management Contract, as he was a Council representative for Gravesham Community Leisure Limited (GCLL).  As such he would be leaving the meeting for agenda items 18 & 21.

No decisions other than those already circulated had been made.

To approve the updated Street Naming and Numbering Policy.

To delegate authority to the Director (Corporate Services) in conjunction with the Portfolio holder for future policy updates.

The Director (Corporate Services) presented a report on the updated Street Naming and Numbering Policy.  The current policy had been formally adopted in September 2016.  The policy set out in report had been updated to clarify some procedures with appropriate legislation updated.  Updates were also required against recommendations from a code of practice compiled by GeoPlace LLP. Members were advised that a summary of the policy changes were set out in section 2 of the report.

Resolved that:-

·         Cabinet approved the updated Street Naming and Numbering Policy.

·         Cabinet to delegate authority to the Director (Corporate Services) in conjunction with the Portfolio holder for future policy updates.

The Chief Executive provided Cabinet with an update on key achievements of the Council for the period May – November 2024.  It was noted that this was the first report of its kind to be set before the Cabinet.  Members were informed that the achievement summary within the report had been categorised by portfolio. The report also outlined the various award successes the Council had achieved during this period, along with key achievements around external funding and commercial activities, with the Council’s trading companies.

The Chair commended the report and acknowledged that the Council’s achievements should be celebrated to recognise the hard work of both officers and Members.

Members attention was drawn to paragraph 3.1.2 which highlighted commendations and successes, which highlighted a small sampling of what had been achieved during the year.  In light of the recent Government paper on devolution, the Chair expressed that the report presented good examples of what local government could deliver on a local level.

The Cabinet acknowledged that some of the work outlined in the report was produced through Cabinet Committees in conjunction with portfolio holders and officers, with a responsive and collaborative approach.  It was important to celebrate this moving forward and share the Council’s successes with the local residents.

Under the Community and Leisure portfolio it was noted that the recent launch of the Gravesham tourism brand had been a great success with an increase of visitors to the area.  The recent tennis project was proving a success and would be positive asset in respect of both increased visitors and through improving the health and welfare of local residents.

The Cabinet noted the report.

To endorse the action by the Director (Corporate Services) to reflect an additional loss on collection of up to 1% when calculating the Council Tax Base for 2025/26

The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) updated Members on the risk and implications should Kent County Council (KCC) remove Council tax incentive funding from the Council, impacting on the amount of Council Tax levied and the Council’s ability to pursue non-payment of Council Tax, which would ultimately reduce the Council Tax Base for 2025/26.

The Cabinet were informed of an increased risk that Kent County Council would remove the Council tax incentive payments from all districts, as part of their budget setting proposals for 2025/26.  This withdrawal could see the Council lose up to £258K of discretionary funding.

Members were updated that incentive funds enabled Councils to undertake an enhanced level of recovery work. From this recovery KCC currently received 74p per £1 raised, with the Council receiving 11p.  It was explained that based on this ratio there was a greater cost for the Council to issue a statutory reminder for nonpayment of Council tax for a sum of say £10, with the Council receiving £1.10 with KCC receiving £7.40.

If incentive funding was removed, this would see local district Councils having to review and potentially reduce the level of resourcing for administering Council tax, which would result in a lower collection.  To mitigate this risk Kent districts were considering increasing their loss on collection by up to 1%. 

The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) drew Members attention to paragraph 1.8 of the report which outlined how the withdrawal of funds would affect the collection of funds, impacting all major preceptors including the Council. As a result, the Council would be impacted further with a potential income loss of £84K.  KCC would be impacted by an income loss of £587K, just for the Gravesham area alone.

The Chair sought clarity, as the paper alluded that in the event of KCC withdrawing funding, the Council would act accordingly.  However, the Chair was of the understanding that the Council would need to notify Kent by the end of December of the Council Tax Base for 2025/26.  The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) explained that was the requirement and that all preceptors including Parishes would be notified.  The Director (Corporate Services) added that KCC had been notified last week of a provisional tax base, set at a 1% loss in collection.  This was the stance taken by a number of other Kent authorities.

The Chair expressed his disappointment at Kent County Council and noted that the action proposed to save £1.25 million, could lead to a large net cost, if all Councils were to take the same approach.  The Director (Corporate Services) noted that the income loss to KCC if multiplied across all Kent authorities, would be an approximate total loss of £9.5 million, verses the smaller £3.5 million potential saving to KCC by removing incentive payments.

The Chair noted that parishes, Kent Fire & Rescue and Kent Police would also be greatly impacted by the income raised, if this action took effect.

Resolved that:-

Cabinet endorse the action by the Director (Corporate Services) to reflect an  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) provided Members of the Cabinet with a copy of the annual review which had been conducted in respect of the Payroll Shared Service with Medway Council.  The report was for information purposes only.

Following Gravesham’s Human Resources service being brought back inhouse, the Payroll Service Level Agreement needed to be expanded to include key performance indicators, the production of scheduled standard management information reports and to agree processes/charges for bespoke non-standard reports.

The Cabinet were updated that a good service has been received over the past 12 months with all monthly payroll schedule deadlines having been met.

The payroll service, including a reporting system, for 2024-25 had a £70,000 annual budget. This represented good value for money, with alternative options (such as bringing in an in-house team or outsourcing) coming out at a higher cost.  The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) added that future service improvements were also being planned.

The Cabinet agreed the service was performing well. Members raised the plans for improvement to SS4U and requested an update. The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) informed Member that he had attended a meeting recently on this matter and plans were moving forward.

The Cabinet noted the report.

The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) presented Cabinet with the review of Fees and Charges 2025-26.  Members were informed the report was for information only and set out the findings of the recent fees and charges annual review.

The Cabinet were updated on key areas of the report:

·         There were no planned increases to car park fees or budgets for next year, following increases that were introduced last year.

·         An additional income of £14,900 was expected through the waste and recycling collection for the next year, which was mainly due to the increased fee for the garden waste collection subscription.

·         Trade waste collection would continue to be charged on a case-by-case basis.  An increase in income was expected of over £45,000 due to a higher demand for the service.

·         With the introduction of the central local land charges register earlier in the year, fees relating to local land searched had been removed.  This removal was expected to cost the Council £35K in lost revenue in 2025/26.  Fees relating to commercial and residential searches remained.

·         Charges in respect of cemeteries and burials had been increased to reflect recent inflationary pressures, staffing and material costs, which reflected an average rise of 9% in fees. Despite the increases it was expected income and budget would be reduced by nearly £23K or 10% due to forecast trends.

·         Planning fees had been updated to reflect the true cost of the service and also an introduction of new fees linked to administration. This change was following a public consultation and announcement from central government, that significant changes would be applied to the planning system from January 2025. The revised fees were expected to generate an additional income of £33K.

·         There were proposed increases to existing fees at The Woodville which were largely inflation related, but some after review, were to generate additional income.  Booking fees would increase by 50 pence per ticket, which would generate an additional £10K of income. Room hire charges had been increased with an expected additional income of £15K.

Overall, the review of fees and charges was expected to deliver an additional £69K of income for 2025/26.

The Chair noted that the increases were mainly modest rises and noted that despite difficult financial times, there had been no increase to car park charges with free services remaining on Sundays and after 6pm.

In terms of planning fees, Members noted that fees were set to ensure that those who could afford to do so bore the greater cost.  Fees were kept to the minimum required for smaller scale applications, so not a blanket increase across the board but a more targeted approach.

The Cabinet noted the report.

To adopt the revised Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Rent Setting Policy to be implemented from 1 April 2025

The Cabinet were presented with a revised Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Rent Setting policy, which was in place to ensure equitable, sustainable, and legally compliant rent structures for the councils social housing tenants.

The Director (Housing) explained that social landlords were required to have this policy in place to comply with the regulator of social housing’s rent standard.  The current rent setting policy was adopted by Cabinet in 2015 and allowed social landlords to increase rents by CPI (Consumer Price Index) plus 1%. Despite the consultation on this still being open, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government had advised this was likely to remain the same.

The updated policy did not present changes to social or affordable rent but if adopted would change how service charges were recovered.  Members were informed that service charges were additional fees tenants paid to cover communal services, maintenance of the building/estate.  Such costs varied depending on the cost incurred by the landlord.  Service charges were not subject to the same controls as rent and should be reflective of the cost incurred. 

It was noted that historically the Council had capped the amount charged for service charges, meaning all tenants partially funded a service they did not directly benefit from and had therefore been subsidised.  The updated policy now sought to recover the full cost of service charges. With HRA accounts under increasing pressure it was important to recover full costs of a service to ensure the landlord could meet its increasing obligations.

The Chair queried whether Gravesham would be following the required Government formula and if this was not adhered to, whether this could impact the existing loan repayments.  The Director (Housing) confirmed this was the case and required in order to pay back the historic loan and to maximise income into the HRA account.  For clarity the Chair explained that the historic loan had been enforced by central government against housing stock owned by the Council and stood at approximately £88 million, greatly reduced from the original figure of over £100 million, so a positive management of the debt.  The Director (Corporate Services) added that the debt/re-financing came about in 2012/2013.  Since that time there had been a number of significant changes with the HRA and the statutory and regulatory requirements.  Responsibilities for a landlord with HRA stock were far greater now, than at the point of taking the loan.

Resolved that:-

Cabinet to adopt the revised Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Rent Setting Policy to be implemented from 1 April 2025

The Cabinet were presented with the Housing Revenue Account Budget Monitoring Report – Month 7 2024/25.  The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) advised that due to the usual month 2 report being replaced with the month 7 report, this paper had already been scrutinised by the Finance & Audit Committee on 10 December 2024.

The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) highlighted:

·         As of 31 October, there was a forecast overspend of £352K, which was an increase of the overspend of £166K from quarter 1.  This shortfall would need to be met by the HRA general reserve, unless officers could identify areas of underspend before the end of the financial year.

·         Based on the variances at the end of month 7, the HRA was anticipated to retain it’s £3 million working balance with the HRA general reserve balance expected to reduce to £1.4 million, after taking into consideration the overspend mentioned.

·         The was a variance of £16.1 million against the new build programme.  The budget included the purchase of units at Cable Wharf, which would no longer proceed.  After reviewing the programme and schemes such as Lower Range Road, projects had been brought forward to replace schemes that had been removed.  The purchase of units at Crescent House continued to be worked on.

The Chair reiterated that the paper had been scrutinised prior to Cabinet at Finance and Audit Committee.  The Assistant Director (Corporate Service) confirmed that no concerns had been raised.

The Cabinet noted the report.

The Cabinet were presented with the General Fund Budget Monitoring Report 2024/25 - Month Seven.  The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) advised that this paper had also been scrutinised by the Finance & Audit Committee on 10 December 2024, where no comments or concerns were raised.

The Assistant Director (Corporate Services) highlighted key points from the report.

·         There was a projected favourable variance of £892K for the year.  This reduced the planned draw down from working balances to meet spending plans for the year, to a lower figure of just over £1 million.

·         There were notable variances identified in the report, arising from the Council’s proactive balancing the budget activity across all directorates.

·         There was ongoing action by the Council to manage spend on temporary accommodation and the decision taken by Kent County Council relating to waste disposal arrangements.

·         At the end of the reporting period for 2024/25 the general fund capital programme of expenditure sat at £6,016.640.

The Chair noted the paper had also been scrutinised prior to Cabinet at Finance and Audit Committee.  The Director (Corporate Service) advised there had been interest from the Finance and Audit Committee surrounding the KCC initiative, particularly the Council tax incentive scheme, in which she had referred Members to the report within the Cabinet agenda, for further information. 

The Chair expressed his disappointment with Kent County Council in relation to the added expenditure incurred for waste and recycling and the additional financial responsibility of rehoming care leavers who were now over 18, which was previously a function of KCC.

The Cabinet referred to 3.4.4 of the report, in regard to ‘St George’s Centre Net Income: £270k adverse variance’ and noted the great improvement to the level of variance, commending the hard work of officers involved in reducing this.

The Cabinet noted the report.

1.     The Director (Housing) in consultation with the S.151 Officer and Lead Member be given delegated authority to make a planning application and if approved, use relevant frameworks (including direct award if appropriate) or a tender portal to procure and award any main contract in accordance with Gravesham's Procurement Strategy to complete the works.

2.     The Director (Housing) in consultation with the S.151 Officer and Lead Member be given delegated authority to negotiate and agree on amendments both contractually and budgetary if required as long as the returned tender price and any subsequent amendments, relative to anticipated rental income, continues to demonstrate the scheme can repay the associated borrowing within a period of not more than 30 years.

The Cabinet were presented with a report outlining the redevelopment of a vacant 1 bed bungalow into new 4/5 bedroom two-storey family Council home, that would involve a planning application and the procurement of a suitable contractor to build the new home.

The Director (Housing) informed Members that historically, the property has been let to older people, who had struggled to maintain the large rear garden. Due to this, the last

person to occupy the property was a single younger person, who did not look after the property or respect the community. As a result of this the council evicted the tenant.  The property was left in a state of disrepair and needed significant investment and therefore a decision was taken to redevelop the property.  This redevelopment would ensure the property could be let to tenants more in keeping to the surrounding properties, which were all family homes.

Various types of design had been considered however with a need for large family homes, this option was pursued. 

As the cost to develop a large 4-5 bedroom detached property was expensive, consideration had been given to purchasing such a property from the open market, however purchasing a non-standard Council property came with risk and cost to ensure it met decent homes standards.  As a result, redeveloping of 107 Vale Road was deemed more cost effective in achieving large family home in the HRA, whilst minimising future maintenance costs.  The cost of developing the property was within the Council financial parameters of viable development and would be repaid within 27 years.

The Chair queried if there was a demand for 4/5 bedroom family homes and how this property would be excluded in regard to the Right to Buy scheme.  The Director (Housing) expressed there was a need for such a property, with the Council owning very few larger family homes.  Members were update that there were currently 27 households on the waiting list for 4/5 bedroom homes and a couple of these had specialist needs, in which the Council would look to work with.  Anything created on this level would be exempt from Right to Buy.

The Director (Housing) informed Members the property would follow the planning process under the local design guide and be in keeping with the surrounding area.

Resolved that:-

1.    The Director (Housing) in consultation with the S.151 Officer and Lead Member be given delegated authority to make a planning application and if approved, use relevant frameworks (including direct award if appropriate) or a tender portal to procure and award any main contract in accordance with Gravesham's Procurement Strategy to complete the works.

2.    The Director (Housing) in consultation with the S.151 Officer and Lead Member be given delegated authority to negotiate and agree on amendments both contractually and budgetary if required as long as the returned tender price and any subsequent amendments, relative to anticipated rental income, continues to demonstrate the scheme can repay the associated borrowing within a period of not more than 30 years.

The minutes of the Climate Change Advisory Board held on Monday 7 October 2024 were agreed.

The minutes of the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Committee held on Wednesday 24 October 2024 were agreed.

The minutes of the Gravesham Joint Transportation Board held on Wednesday 27 November 2024 were agreed.

·        Members support the proposals as set out within the report, including the current negotiated position with GCLL, alongside the trust’s capital investment and financial proposals.

·        To grant delegated authority to the Director (Communities & Inclusive Growth) in consultation with the Leader, the Director (Corporate Services) (in the role of S151 officer) and the Monitoring Officer; to take all necessary practical, financial and legal actions required to finalise the negotiations.

The Cabinet were presented with a report outlining the latest information on the negotiations for an extended contract and lease with the existing leisure trust, GCLL, to maintain quality of service and delivery of leisure centre operations in the medium to long term.

The Director (Communities and Inclusive Growth) & Deputy Chief Executive informed Members that the report proposed a 10 year extension to the contract that was currently held by GCLL to manage both Cygnets and Cascades Leisure Centres.  Independent advice had been received that the proposed contracts were good value for money.  At this stage the Council were not proposing to go to full tender, on the basis that the market was unlikely to show interest, due to uncertainties surrounding the future leisure provision, such as being unable to confirm the plans to rebuild Cascades centre, as the Council were awaiting confirmation of funding for the project.  The Council were therefore proposing an extension of the current contract.

The Cabinet expressed that they were happy with the level of service provided by GCLL and noted that investment was needed due to the age of the buildings.

Cabinet approved the recommendations.

The Cabinet were presented with a report outlining the latest information on the negotiations for an extended contract and lease with the existing leisure trust, GCLL, to maintain quality of service and delivery of leisure centre operations in the medium to long term.

Resolved that:-

1.    Members support the proposals as set out within the report, including the current negotiated position with GCLL, alongside the trust’s capital investment and financial proposals.

2.    Cabinet to grant delegated authority to the Director (Communities & Inclusive Growth) in consultation with the Leader, the Director (Corporate Services) (in the role of S151 officer) and the Monitoring Officer; to take all necessary practical, financial and legal actions required to finalise the negotiations

The minutes of the Northfleet Harbourside Steering Group held on Wednesday 16 October 2024 were agreed.

The minutes of Rosherville Shareholder Advisory Board held on Tuesday 12 November 2024 were agreed.