The Chairman will advise the meeting of the evacuation procedures to follow in the event of an emergency. This is particularly important for visitors and members of the public who will be unfamiliar with the building and procedures.

The Chairman will inform the meeting whether there is a planned evacuation drill due to take place, what the alarm sounds like (i.e. ringing bells), where the closest emergency exit route is, and where the second closest emergency exit route is, in the event that the closest exit or route is blocked.

The Chairman will inform the meeting that:

(a) in the event of the alarm sounding, everybody must leave the building via the nearest safe available exit and gather at the Assembly points at the far side of the Car Park; and

(b) the lifts must not be used in the event of an evacuation.

Any officers present at the meeting will aid with the evacuation.

It is important that the Chairman is informed of any person attending who is disabled or unable to use the stairs, so that suitable arrangements may be made in the event of an emergency.

The Chairman outlined the fire evacuation procedure.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 12 October 2016 (Minute Nos. 929 - 937) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 12 October 2016 (Minutes Nos. 929 – 937) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

In response to a member of the Scrutiny Committee, the Senior Democratic Services Officer confirmed that the Cabinet had considered the Scrutiny Committee recommendations at their meeting on 5 October 2016 to include the wording at Minute No. 843, Recommendation (i) ‘…….and ensure that the Scrutiny Discipline is recognised’ as confirmed in the written transcript from the meeting but that Project Management was the preferred wording.

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.

(c)          Where it is possible that a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts would conclude that there was a real possibility that the Member might be predetermined or biased the Member should declare their predetermination or bias and then leave the room while that item is considered.

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.

Councillor Ken Ingleton declared a non-pecuniary interest as he was Chairman of licenced premises.

The Chairman reversed the running order of the meeting, starting with Item 10 Urgent Business Requests.

The Committee is asked to consider any requests from Committee Members to commence a review.

There were no urgent business requests.

The Committee is asked to consider the Forward Plan with a view to identifying possible items for pre-decision scrutiny.

The Chairman advised Members of three updates to the Forward Plan.

The Sittingbourne Town Centre Regeneration Project – variations to the development agreement and the Adoption of Biodiversity Action Plan and Swale Green Grid Strategy Swale Green Grid Partnership would now be presented to the Cabinet meeting on 1 February 2017. The Local Development Framework Panel on 1 December 2016 was cancelled.

A Member reminded the meeting that the Scrutiny Committee report on the Leisure and Tourism Review would be considered at the Cabinet Meeting on 7 December 2016 and encouraged Members to attend, particularly those Members of the Task and Finish Group.

The Committee is asked to review and discuss the Committee’s Work Programme for the remainder of the year.

The Policy and Performance Officer introduced the report and drew attention to the Budget Scrutiny Meeting scheduled for 26 January 2017.  The Chairman reminded the meeting that all members of the Scrutiny Committee should attend this meeting, and for all Members to attend the Scrutiny Committee Meeting on 29 November 2016 which would be hearing the call-in of the Cabinet’s decision on Capital Financing and Investment.

The Committee is asked to consider updates on other reviews.

Development Management

The Chairman, as Review Co-Ordinator, advised the meeting that work on the Development Management Review would be commencing before the end of the year.

Housing Services

The Chairman invited the Housing Services Task and Finish Group to update the meeting and referred to the Tabled report.

A Member advised that two visits to other Councils were currently being arranged, that expected changes in legislation could cause further pressure on the service and there were 139 homeless families currently living in temporary accommodation.

A Member suggested the wording in the second bullet point be changed to read “To explore the causes of pressures on housing services including but not limited to...”.

The Committee is asked to review the updated log of recommendations.

The Policy and Performance Officer introduced the report and highlighted that the two recommendations on the MKS (formerly MKIP) Governance and Communications review were yet to be implemented, two recommendations on the Sittingbourne Town Centre Review were rejected and one accepted, and the recommendations on the Leisure and Tourism Review were to be decided at the next Cabinet meeting on 7 December 2016.

A Member raised the issue of the lack of an update on all significant regeneration projects and the Chairman agreed it was disappointing and suggested that the Cabinet Member for Regeneration could attend a future meeting to give an update.  A discussion ensued and the following points were made:

·        Only two face-to-face updates for Group Leaders had taken place over the previous six months;

·        suggestion that an item on Regeneration be included on the Committee’s Agenda more frequently;

·        specific questions to be asked and full responses required;

·        concern that the Media were aware of updates before Members and the sporadic release of information given; and

·        updates required on Sittingbourne, Faversham and the Isle of Sheppey.

The Chairman agreed that the updates received were inappropriate and proposed that Regeneration be a regular item on the Agenda until an appropriate response was received.

The Committee is asked to consider the Review of Fees and Charges.  The Cabinet Member for Finance and Performance and Head of Finance have been invited to attend for this item.

The Chairman welcomed the Cabinet Member for Finance and Performance and the Head of Finance to the meeting.

The Cabinet Member for Finance introduced the report which set out the proposed fees and charges for 2017/18 for submission to Council.  In doing so, he advised that £4million was raised in fees and charges yearly, and that the focus was on specific areas suggested by Members.

The Chairman advised Members that the charges in Appendix II were set nationally.

The Chairman referred to Appendix I.  A Member sought clarification on the benchmarking process with other Councils, whilst another Member considered benchmarking valid, but required more information within the report on the true cost of providing a service.

Car Parks and Season Tickets - Long Stay Covering

A Member asked why different charges applied to car parks in Sheerness to those in Leysdown, since both were considered areas to attract tourism?  The Head of Finance advised he would investigate and report back.

Residents’ Parking Permits (on street)

A Member did not consider it appropriate to increase the cost of Residential Parking Permits to control the number of permits issued, as this could impact on poorer families.  The subject was debated and the Cabinet Member for Safer Families and Communities explained that Residents’ Parking Permits cost more to administer than its fee, but legally a profit could not be made. The primary reason to increase was to cover costs and most schemes were 50% over subscribed.  In response, a Member suggested that the scheme would be fairer if the number of permits issued were limited per household rather than an increase in price.  A proposal to recommend that the fee not be increased was put to the vote but was not supported.

Taxi Licensing

A Member highlighted the significant increase in Vehicle Licensing (1 year) from £160 to £290 and Private Hire Operator Licensing (one payment for 5 years) from £100 to £430, and feared that the increase would be reflected on the cost to the customer.

The Cabinet Member for Safer Families and Communities explained that the maximum cost was set and an operator could charge up to, but not beyond, the maximum limit.  He continued that the pricing regime in Hackney Carriage and Licensing Service was out of date and had not been increased for over five years.  The Cabinet Member for Finance and Performance added that the Transformation Project Team had identified areas in Licensing fees that had been undercharging for some years and the current proposed increases were addressing that issue.

A discussion ensued concerning the costs of the service and whether more detailed information could be supplied.  A Member was supportive of the proposed increase and the Chairman agreed that an increase was appropriate to meet costs.

Bootcamp Licence Fees (per annum)

A Member raised the issue of whether 1-15 people was an appropriate figure and after a short discussion,  the Cabinet Member for Finance and Performance agreed to change the figure in the Appendix to “up  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1015.