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 20 July 2016 (Minute Nos. 791 - 797) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 20 July 2016 (Minutes Nos. 727 -735) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

The Chairman advised of a change to the running order of the meeting to bring forward item 6 Performance Monitoring Report 2015/16 Quarter 4.  Items 7, 8, 9 and 10 were deferred to the next meeting.

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.

No interests were declared.

The Committee is asked to consider the Performance Monitoring Report 2015/16 Quarter 4.

The Chairman welcomed the Cabinet Member for Finance and Performance, the Deputy Cabinet Member for Finance and Performance, and the Policy and Performance Manager to the meeting. The Deputy Cabinet Member for Finance introduced the quarterly portfolio-based balanced scorecards reports for the final quarter of 2015/16 (January – March 2016). He explained that the structure of the report was changing and this was the last time Members would see the information in its current format. 

The Policy and Performance Manager referred to the Corporate Overview balanced scorecard and highlighted that there continued to be no poor or week adverse audit opinions, and that the short and long term sickness figures were low in comparison with the national average. He further highlighted that 96% of complaints were responded to within ten working days.

A Member asked what measures were in place to reduce the strategic risks? The Policy and Performance Manager advised that there were action plans in place.

A Member referred to the adverse audit opinions and asked whether the best practice report that was suggested as part of the peer challenge earlier in 2016, had been received?  The Policy and Performance Manager agreed to find out.

In response to questions from Members relating to long and short-term sickness levels, the Chief Executive explained that there was not a strong connection between long and short-term sickness.  He explained that the figures were still collectively low and within the target for the performance indicator and that the Council was less able to control long-term sickness. He went on to advise that regarding the risk management data the information was a snapshot of that period of time, it was right that some risks would always remain significant risks and there were plans in place to manage the risks.  He stated that mitigation actions were available to the Scrutiny Committee should they wish to see them.

The Policy and Performance Manager agreed to meet with a Member to clarify how the figures were reached.

Members considered the Community Safety and Health balanced scorecard report for (2015/16) Quarter Four.  A Member sought confirmation on the nature of the crimes which occurred within the Sheppey prisons, referred to in the summary.

Members considered the Environment and Rural Affairs balanced scorecard report for 2015/16 Quarter Four.  A Member highlighted the Local Area Perception Survey (LAPS) targets and asked what action was being taken to address the missed targets?  A discussion ensued and the Chief Executive explained that the survey was annual so the figures only changed once a year, and the next survey was about to commence again.  He explained that for street cleansing, there was continuous objective monitoring of levels of detritus, which showed good performance. The Chief Executive advised that an annual briefing note was produced explaining the responses and sample sizes for the LAPS once the results were in and the Policy and Performance Manager confirmed that there were a large number of responses on this particular survey.

There was no discussion on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 842.

The Deputy Cabinet Member for Regeneration and the Interim Director of Regeneration have been invited to attend.

The Chairman welcomed the Deputy Cabinet Member for Regeneration, the Chief Executive, the Interim Director of Regeneration, the Regeneration Project Support Officer, and the Head of Legal Partnership to the meeting.

The Chairman asked Officers and the Deputy Cabinet Member for Regeneration to give an overview of the original scheme and the current position.

The Chief Executive gave a short history and outlined that in 2012 Swale Borough Council went to market with a combination of its own and Kent County Council land in the Town Centre, and a consortium of Cathedral Group, Altyon Partners and Essential Land, called the Spirit of Sittingbourne, won the procurement exercise.  A Development Agreement was agreed, which set out what partners were trying to achieve. There have been various take-overs and changes to the consortium since then, and it currently consists of the Quinn Group, U and I, and Essential Land. The consortium, supported by the Council were also successful in its bid for Local Growth Fund money, receiving an allocation of £2.5 million.

The Chairman invited Members to ask questions and the following issues were raised:

·        clarification on the delay in highways realignment and changes to the station forecourt, and whether the Local Growth Fund money would be reclaimed if the works were not carried out by the end of the financial year?;

·        was the project built around the sale of properties, and what was Plan B if the current approach failed?;

·        confirmation of who sat on the Strategic and Operational Boards;

·        what was the benefit of the Travel Lodge Hotel planning application recently submitted?

·        had the 0.6m parking space provision for each unit at the two-bedroomed flats at Cockleshell Walk Car Park site changed, and where would service vehicles and visitors park?

·        would the drop-off and pick-up area around the train station be enhanced? and

·        concern over the lack of connectivity between the High Street and the development site.

The Regeneration Project Support Officer explained that the highways and Network Rail issues were complicated because it was the main A2 and needed to provide pedestrian, taxi and bus access.  He advised that the plans were at a very advanced stage, and he would be meeting with Network Rail and Kent Highways soon.

The Chief Executive advised that it was envisaged from the start that the development would go to the market for funding, and that it was never the case that the sale of the residential properties would be enough to fund the whole scheme.

The Chief Executive advised that a list of who sat on the Strategic and Operational Boards could be provided but stressed that neither were decision-making boards and they did not have delegated powers.

The Deputy Cabinet Member for Regeneration considered the interest by Travel Lodge Hotel a positive development, and the Chief Executive added that the Travel Lodge Hotel would be a positive signal to the market.  The Regeneration Project Officer advised that the design of the Travel Lodge Hotel would compliment the cinema.

The Regeneration Project  ...  view the full minutes text for item 843.

This item was deferred to the next Scrutiny Meeting on 12 October 2016.

This item was deferred to the next Scrutiny Meeting on 12 October 2016.

This item was deferred to the next Scrutiny Meeting on 12 October 2016.

This item was deferred to the next Scrutiny Meeting on 12 October 2016.

There were no urgent business reports.

At 10pm and 10.30pm Members agreed to the suspension of Standing Orders in order that the Committee could complete its business.