Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Fearn, Andy Stamp and Rupert Turpin.

To approve the Record of the Meeting held on 13 October 2022.

A Member asked for clarification of whether the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Economic Growth and Regulation had received the letters referred to in the minutes of the 13 October 2022 Committee meeting and therefore whether she would be providing a response.

The Member asked whether there was an error within the minutes as the minutes stated that the Portfolio Holder had said that it was considered likely that the designation of the land at Chatham Docks would be determined by the courts. It was questioned whether this was accurate as the designation was not a matter to be determined by the courts.

The Member also asked for an update in relation to the request made during the October Committee meeting that the Committee be provided with written updates to set out the process for gathering Local Plan evidence and the timetable for this.

The Director of Place and Deputy Chief Executive confirmed that the minutes of the 13 October meeting were accurate. He advised that there had been communication in relation to Local Plan timelines and more formal documentation would be issued. The Local Development Scheme set out broad headlines for the work.

The record of the meeting held on 13 October 2022 was agreed and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

The Chairman will announce any late items which do not appear on the main agenda but which he/she has agreed should be considered by reason of special circumstances to be specified in the report.

There were none.

The Chairman announced that he had agreed a request for Agenda Item No.6 (Annual Scrutiny of the Community Safety Partnership, Including an Update on the Community Safety Plan 2020 – 2024) to be considered before Agenda Item No.5 (Attendance by the Portfolio Holder for Resources). The other reports were considered in the order set out in the agenda.

Members are invited to disclose any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Significant Interests in accordance with the Member Code of Conduct. Guidance on this is set out in agenda item 4.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other significant interests (OSIs)

There were none.

Other interests

Councillor Tranter declared an interest in any reference to Kent Fire and Rescue as he is the Vice Chairman.

This report sets out progress made within the areas covered by the Portfolio Holder for Resources which fall within the remit of this Committee.

Discussion:

The Committee received an overview of progress made on the areas within the scope of the Portfolio Holder for Resources which fell within the remit of this Committee.

The Portfolio Holder introduced a short video produced by Medway Development Company (MDC) to be used as a marketing tool to promote development at Chatham Waterfront.

The Portfolio Holder responded to Members’ questions and comments as follows:

Unauthorised traveller encampments – A Member asked the Portfolio Holder for his view on new powers to tackle unauthorised traveller encampments. The Portfolio Holder considered that they would help. It needed to be considered that travellers had a significant level of rights. The process for dealing with encampments started with welfare checks. This would be followed by the issuing of a Section 75 notice which usually gave three days for the site to be vacated. Where this was not complied with, the Council needed to return to court to obtain a section 76 notice. Where this was not complied with, the Council could then instruct bailiffs. In the most recent year there had been 18 incidents but only one had required bailiff involvement. The Portfolio Holder said that Medway’s response had improved significantly. He thanked officers for their work and local MP, Tracey Crouch, who had moved a parliamentary amendment to enable costs to be charged back. The Portfolio Holder said that the powers would only be used where necessary. The issue was primarily a Council responsibility but the Police could take action in specific circumstances.

Chatham Waterfront video, the former Debenhams building and Chatham infrastructure – A Member asked how much the promotional video the Committee had just been shown on Chatham Waterfront had cost. They also asked the Portfolio Holder for his view on using the former Debenhams building as a community facility, including relocating Chatham Library to it. He also asked how the infrastructure in the centre of Chatham would cope with the expected population increase of 2,000 due to the development taking place there. The Member also asked for clarification of what the table at 22.4.6 of the report in the agenda was showing. This related to the Pentagon Centre.

The Portfolio Holder advised that the video had cost £9,000. This had been produced in lieu of an architect’s model which would have cost £150,000. A marketing exercise was taking place to consider the future use of the Debenhams building and a number of interested parties had come forward. The vast majority of people moving into new developments were existing Medway residents who were therefore already using local infrastructure. Additional infrastructure would be provided, including a substantial Healthy Living Centre on the first floor of the Pentagon Shopping Centre. The Pentagon was now trading well and there were few empty shops on the ground floor. There had been significant interest from potential new occupiers. The Pentagon was making money and while this was not as much as expected, it was making a positive contributing to the Council’s budget. It had,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 452.

Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) are under a duty to produce a Community Safety Plan to formulate and implement a strategy to reduce crime and disorder, combat substance misuse, and reduce re-offending.

This report provides information on the operation of the CSP from October

2021, which summarises the findings of the strategic assessment. This report provides information on the Community Safety Plan covering the period from 2020 to 2024.

Discussion:

The Chairman welcomed the partners of the Community Safety Partnership (CSP) to the meeting.

The Committee discussed the following topics:

Probation Service representation, crime rates and policing reductions -

A Member asked why no Probation Service representative was present at the meeting. They also asked whether Medway was considered to be a safer or less safe place since 2015/16, in the context of incidents of violence having increased by 12.5%, sexual offences 22.5% and burglary 7.5%. It was also asked what consultation had been undertaken in relation to reductions to town centre and school policing teams and what the expected level of reductions to the number of Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) in Medway was.

Superintendent Marsh considered that Medway was a safer place than it had been ten years ago. Kent Police was committed to crime data integrity and accurate recording of incidents. There had been significant work in relation to safety initiatives such as work to reduce violence against women and girls and preventative work in relation to sexual offending and the night time economy. Kent Police had faced staffing issues in answering calls and officers had needed to be reassigned from other areas. This included 35 Police Officers, 26 of which had been working in schools. There had not been time for consultation with schools and this had been addressed subsequently. It was considered that the eight or nine officers who had been working in Medway Schools had made a significant impact. As part of remodelling work being undertaken a child centred policing team would be established. Schools would be allocated named officers to maintain and build on the strong relationships previously established.

In relation to town centres, it was considered that the PCSOs based there had done a fantastic job. In future, each ward in Kent and Medway would have a named police officer and the remodelling work would see a significant increase in neighbourhood officers, the exact numbers were not currently known but there were due to be a total of 4,145 police officers across Kent and Medway by March 2023, which would be the highest ever level. It was acknowledged that call responses for the 111 non-emergency number had been unacceptable. Work was taking place to address this, including encourage callers to use a live chat function, but it was acknowledged that this was not suitable for everyone.

Publication dates and Strep A – A Member asked when a report looking at serious youth crime would be published and when the Combatting Drugs Partnership would publish its Needs Assessment and Strategic Action Plan. The Member also asked how Public Health was responding in relation to the current outbreak of the Strep A bacterial infection. The Public Health Principal and Head of Public Health said that information had been provided to schools in Medway, including signs and symptoms, what to do and how to get support. Close working was taking place with the Health Protection Authority to track numbers and information being shared with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 453.

Medway’s Council Plan 2022/23 sets out the Council’s three priorities. This report and appendices summarise how we performed in Q2 2022/23 on the delivery of the programmes and measures which fall under the remit of this committee which are: Place and Growth.

Discussion:

The Committee received a report setting out performance for Quarter 2 against the Council's two priorities, Place and Growth, insofar as they fell within the remit of this Committee, along with a review of the Council’s Risk Register. The following issues were discussed:

Inclusion of climate change indicator – In relation to the programme, ‘getting around Medway – tackle congestion hotspots by transport and public realm improvements’, a Member commented that there was no reference to climate change associated with the measure and that it would be helpful to link it to Air Quality Management Areas. This would be taken forward by officers.

Cycling and walking measures and timeliness of information – It was suggested that there needed to be measures to monitor the effectiveness of people being encouraged to cycle or walk. It was also asked why there was such a significant time lag in relation to the strategic risk information included in the report and why some of the performance commentary provided was also out of date.

The Assistant Director, Frontline Services said that the Member Advisory Group on Climate change had agreed that a sub-group would be created that would focus on active travel.

The Chief Finance Officer said that the strategic risk information was reported at the same time as the Council Plan measures and that it could be made more timely by providing the risk information separately to the Council Plan measure but this would require separate reports to the Committee. The information included in the report went through a significant internal review process ahead of consideration by the Committee and it therefore represented a snapshot in time. The scheduling of meetings also meant that there was a slightly longer time lag before Quarter 2 performance information was considered by the Committee when compared to Quarter 1 or Quarter 3.

Street litter indicator and street lighting – in relation to the green status of the indicator, ‘Improved street and environmental cleanliness: Litter’ a Member said this was not representative of the picture across the whole of Medway as one street might have no litter while a neighbouring street could have significant litter. The Member also considered that the replacement of Medway street lights had left some gaps in lighting columns and that streets that looked darker.

Decision:

a)    The Committee considered the Q2 2022/23 performance against the measures used to monitor progress against the Council’s priorities and considered the amended Strategic Risk Summary, as set out in Appendix 3 of the report.

b)    The Committee noted the classification of risks as live or managed, as set out in sections 2.6 and 2.7 of the report.

c)    The Committee determined that it would like sight of the RCE Directorate Risk Summary, as set out in section 2.8 of the report.

d)    The Committee requested that officers look at better ways of incorporating climate objectives and air quality information into future performance monitoring reports.

This report sets out the Council’s draft capital and revenue budgets for 2023/24. In accordance with the Constitution, Cabinet is required to develop ‘initial budget proposals’ approximately three months before finalising the budget and setting council tax levels at the end of February 2023.

The draft budget is based on the principles set out in the Financial Outlook 2023/24 considered by the Cabinet on 18 October 2022.

Background:

The Committee received a report providing an update on progress towards setting the Council’s draft capital and revenue budgets for 2023/24.

The report set out the process by which the budget would progress through to Cabinet and Council in February 2023.

Decision:

The Committee noted that Cabinet had instructed officers to continue to work with Portfolio Holders in formulating robust proposals to balance the budget for 2023/24.

This report provides an update and presentation on the SQW commission to produce a River Strategy and to consider progress so far.

Discussion:

This report provided an update on the production of a River Strategy and progress to date. The following issues were discussed:

General progress on Strategy – A Member said that they were encouraged by the progress being made in the development of the Strategy and anticipated that it would cover all required areas. It would have a role in strategically informing other aspects of Council work such as planning, tourism and the environment. The Member hoped that the Strategy would enable all activities benefiting from or contributing to the River Medway to be considered and looked forward to the AECOM activity data being available.

The Greenspace and Access Programme Manager said that the work being undertaken had asked the question of what was making the river tick and what was dependent on the river. A list of partners and stakeholders had been identified and assurance was given that the Strategy would link all Council service delivery relevant to the river and explore related opportunities.

Engagement activity – A Member agreed that the work being undertaken was promising. They highlighted that the work should not be looked at in isolation and the importance of engagement with Maidstone Borough Council, Kent County Council and Southern Water. It was suggested that the Strategy work should also include Chatham Docks. Another Member requested that local Ward Members should be involved in Strategy development. They highlighted the need for both rediscovery and the discovery of new things in relation to the River. A Member requested that engagement work include the Freemen of the River, houseboat owners and Peel Ports.

Strategy development – It was asked what the timescales were for developing the Strategy further and when it would be brought back to the Committee.

The Director of Place and Deputy Chief Executive said that engagement work would include the Freemen of the River / Rochester Oyster and Floating Fishery as well as Southern Water and Peel Ports with a view to engagement around roles and responsibility.

The Assistant Director, Regeneration said that work would be undertaken to identify further stakeholders. The Strategy would be developed steadily and it was proposed that further detail would be presented to the Committee at a future meeting. It was anticipated this would be in late spring or early Summer 2023.

Decision:

The Committee:

a)    Noted progress on the River Strategy.

b)    Requested that the AECOMreport be circulated to the Committee once available.

c)    Requested that Members provide officers suggested consultees in relation to development of the Strategy.

d)    Noted that the River Strategy would next be presented to the Committee in Summer 2023.

This report provides information on Section 106 (S106) legal agreements and proposes to circulate a quarterly briefing note for members on S106 activities in line with regular reporting to Planning Committee. Wider information, including annual spend, will be provided through the Medway Infrastructure Funding Statement.

 Discussion:

This report provided information on Section 106 (S106) legal agreements and proposed to circulate a quarterly briefing note for Members on S106 activities in line with regular reporting to Planning Committee. It also proposed that wider information, including annual spend, would be provided through the Medway Infrastructure Funding Statement.

Payment of S106 Contributions – A Member expressed concern that some developers tried to avoid making S106 contributions and suggested that the Council needed to take a robust approach to ensure that the contributions owed were collected.

Ward Member engagement – It was requested that steps be taken to ensure engagement with relevant ward Councillors in relation to spend of S106 contributions.

The Head of Planning highlighted that S106 contributions would not fund all infrastructure requirements. The Government had recently reaffirmed a brownfield first development approach, the development of which did not generate the same level of S106 contributions as greenfield sites. The need to ensure sufficient engagement with ward Councillors was acknowledged.

Decision:

a)    The Committee noted the contents of this report and its appendices.

b)    The Committee agreed that a quarterly S106 briefing note for all Members be introduced in line with information reported to Planning Committee on:

·       S106 agreements completed in each quarter and the obligations/contributions included in these agreements

·       S106 contributions received in each quarter and which services the funding would support.

c)    The Committee agreed that following the approval of the annual Medway Infrastructure Funding Statement by the Cabinet, that the document be reported to the next meeting of the Regeneration, Culture and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

This report advises the Committee of petitions received by the Council which fall within the remit of this Committee including a summary of the responses sent to the petition organisers by officers.

Discussion:

The Committee received a report setting out petitions received by the Council which fell within the remit of this Committee including a summary of the responses sent to petition organisers by officers.

Decision:

The Committee noted the petition responses and appropriate officer action set out in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the report.

This item advises Members of the current work programme and allows the Committee to adjust it in the light of latest priorities, issues and circumstances. It gives Members the opportunity to shape and direct the Committee’s activities over the year. 

Discussion:

The Committee received a report setting out the current work programme. It was requested that a briefing note be provided in January 2023 on the work of the Combatting Drugs Partnership and that a briefing note be provided in six months time on the work of the Community Safety Partnership.

Decision:

The Committee:

a)      Agreed the proposed work programme, set out at Appendix A to the report, which includes the recommendations of the pre-agenda meeting outlined in paragraphs 3.3 to 3.5 of the report and the other changes proposed at paragraphs 3.6 and 4.6 to 4.7 of the report.

b)      Agreed to recommend to Full Council to change to the Overview and Scrutiny Rules set out in the Council’s Constitution (Chapter 4, Part 5) as set out in Appendix F to the report.

c)      Requested that a briefing note be provided in January 2023 on the work of the Combatting Drugs Partnership and that a briefing note be provided in six months time on the work of the Community Safety Partnership.