Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves or their spouse, civil partner or person with whom they are living with as a spouse or civil partner.  They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships.

The Chairman will ask Members if they have any interests to declare in respect of items on this agenda, under the following headings:

(a)          Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPI) under the Localism Act 2011.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DPI, the Member must leave the meeting and not take part in the discussion or vote.  This applies even if there is provision for public speaking.

(b)          Disclosable Non Pecuniary (DNPI) under the Code of Conduct adopted by the Council in May 2012.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DNPI interest, the Member may stay, speak and vote on the matter.

Advice to Members:  If any Councillor has any doubt about the existence or nature of any DPI or DNPI which he/she may have in any item on this agenda, he/she should seek advice from the Director of Corporate Services as Monitoring Officer, the Head of Legal or from other Solicitors in Legal Services as early as possible, and in advance of the Meeting.

No interests were declared.

The Committee is asked to consider the Fees and Charges report.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and the Cabinet Member for Environmental and Rural Affairs have been invited to attend the meeting.

The Chairman welcomed Members and Officers to the meeting.  The Cabinet Member for Finance introduced the report, which set out the proposed fees and charges for 2016/17 for submission to Council.  In doing so, he explained the importance of the Council setting a balanced budget, and the need to generate income to enable the Council to move towards self-sufficiency so that it could continue to provide good services to the public, that were good value for money.

The Chairman advised Members that there was no need for the Committee to consider Appendix II as these charges were set nationally, and Appendix III was for information.  Members were invited to ask questions regarding Appendix I.

The Director of Corporate Services referred to the update given at the previous week’s Cabinet meeting regarding the charge for the provision of historical information relating to street naming and numbering, and advised that the charge was set nationally.

Car Parks and Season Tickets – Short Stay Covering

Questions were asked regarding the justification for increasing car parking fees; whether it was appropriate to look at bringing the charges in line with neighbouring authorities when incomes were not the same; what impact this would have on the town centre retailers; the timing of the proposed increase, when regeneration would have an impact; and whether it would be possible to look at a short embargo period during the year to see if free car parking made any difference to retailers?

Comments were also made regarding the planned regeneration, which would encourage more people to come to Sittingbourne; that the Council should be encouraging greater use of the car parks; whether there was any opportunity to work with the Sittingbourne Retailers Association for a ‘refund’ scheme; that the Council had not increased car park charges since 2011; and the need for the Council to generate income.

In response, the Cabinet Member for Environmental and Rural Affairs advised that he was reluctant to use comparisons with neighbouring car park charges as the sole justification.  It was important to provide a quality service and he spoke about the need to invest in improvements to car parks such as improved signage and markings, and additional ticket machines.

During the debate Councillor Roger Truelove proposed and Councillor Mike Baldock seconded that the Council should look at the impact of a short embargo period during the year to see if free car parking made any difference to retailers.  This was not supported when put to the vote.

Councillor Mike Baldock proposed that car park charges were not increased.  This was seconded by Councillor Roger Truelove, but was not supported when put to the vote.

Car Parks and Season Tickets – Long Stay Covering

A Member queried why different charges applied to Cockleshell Walk, Sittingbourne,  and Trinity Road, Sheerness, when compared with the rest of the Borough’s car parks.  The Cabinet Member for Environmental and Rural Affairs advised that the difference was historical, to encourage people to use those car parks as they were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 387.