It was resolved that all items be webcast.

Apologies were received from Councillors Mrs Gibson, Pickett, de Wiggondene and Mrs Wilson.

Councillor Beering substituted for Councillor Mrs Wilson, Councillor Black substituted for Councillor Mrs de Wiggondene and Councillor Burton substituted for Councillor Mrs Gibson.

There were no Visiting Members.

There were no disclosures.

It was agreed that all items be taken in public as proposed.

It was resolved that the minutes of the meeting held on 1 November 2011 be agreed as a correct record of the meeting and duly signed.

Interview with Paul Riley, Head of Finance and Customer Services

The Chairman introduced Paul Riley, Head of Finance and Customer Services, Councillor Chris Garland, Leader of the Council, Alison Broom, Chief Executive, Ellie Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager and Georgia Hawkes, Head of Business Improvement.

Mr Riley introduced the Budget Strategy.  He informed Members that the two reports had been taken to Cabinet since he last attended Scrutiny; The Budget Strategy 2012/13 onwards and the Budget Strategy 2012/13 Fees and Charges which covered the changes to the budget to date.  On 8 November 2011 the Council informed of the Revenue Support Grant they would be receiving in 2012/12. The details confirmed the assumed figure of £5.7 million detailed in the Budget Strategy.

It was explained that the report included updates on the changes to date to the strategic revenue projections and savings proposals to achieve a balanced budget. In relation to strategic revenue projections changes included the proposal that the three temporary posts in Economic Development should be made permanent in order to achieve growth in tourism, a priority for Maidstone. Changes to savings proposals included bringing forward savings that had been identified for 2013/14 in Democratic Services and Overview and Scrutiny as they had been achieved early.

Members were informed that the Budget Strategy for the medium term included an assumed 2.5% Council Tax increase in its projections. In 2011/12 the Council had taken a four year grant in place of a rise in Council Tax.  It was explained that the grant on offer from Government for 2012/13 was a one year, one off grant of £339,000 and there was no ongoing financial recompense being offered by Government after that year.  In accepting the grant the Council would be accepting a freeze on Council Tax for 10 years.  In 2013/14 and thereafter the Council would have to find additional savings of £339,000. Mr Riley highlighted that the Budget Strategy Savings Proposals forecast in the Medium Term Financial Strategy for 2013/14 was calculated without taking into account the impact of the grant freeze and were in excess of £600,000 of savings to find.  In 2013/14 without a Council Tax rise and without the grant the Council would have to find over £1million in savings with only £305,830 identified so far.

Members were informed that the if the Council were to refuse the grant from Government and opt to raise Council Tax by 2.5% this would equate to a 0.38% rise to a band D Council Tax bill or £5.56 for the year.

The Committee questioned Maidstone’s Band D average Council Tax bill in comparison to other authorities in Kent.  They were informed that it was the 2^nd highest in Kent.  It was clarified by Officers that Maidstone received more in Council Tax than Government Grant. Members considered the position of other Kent Authorities and were informed that Gravesham Borough Council would not be accepting the Council Tax freeze grant.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Garland, told the Committee that in 2012/13 he expected the Council to benefit financially  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.

Interview with Ellie Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager

The Leader of the Council explained that the Strategic Plan had three main priorities and approximately 60 Key Performance indicators (KPIs), informing Members that KPIs had been significantly reduced by the Coalition Government. He explained that the Strategic Plan offered a detailed breakdown of what the Council sought to achieve from the outcomes of the Priorities set:

1. For Maidstone to have a growing economy

Outcomes:

·  A Transport network that supports the local economy; and

·  A growing economy with rising employment, catering for a range of skill sets to meet the demands of the local economy.

2. For Maidstone to be a decent place to live

Outcomes:

·  Decent, affordable housing in the right place across a range of tenures;

·  Continues to be a clean and attractive environment for people who live and visit the Borough; and

·  Residents are not disadvantaged because of where they live or who they are, vulnerable people are assisted and the level of deprivation is reduced (previously an outcome of Corporate and Customer Excellence).

3. Corporate and Customer Excellence.

Outcome:

·  The Council will continue to have value for money services that residents are satisfied with.

Councillor Garland explained that work had been undertaken to refresh the current priorities with a newly defined focus on the outcomes and the action plan had been updated to show the progress made from April-November 2011.

Ms Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager, explained that the outcome ‘residents are not disadvantaged because of where they live or who they are, vulnerable people are assisted and the level of deprivation is reduced’ had been moved to become an additional outcome of the priority ‘For Maidstone to be a decent place to live’.  As a result an additional outcome was required to address ‘customer excellence’ for the priority ‘Corporate and Customer Excellence.’

Members told the Officer that they found the Strategic Plan to be bold, ambitious and succinct. They questioned the progress of the Leisure and Tourism Strategy which had an original target date of April 2011 as its importance as a strategic priority had been reflected in the Budget Strategy.  Ms Kershaw informed Members that important decisions had been made in relation to the Museum and Hazlitt Theatre which had delayed the action but the relevant paperwork had been completed to move the target date to a more pertinent date in the future.

The Committee questioned the budget savings associated with Planning in relation to its importance to the Council in meeting its priority outcomes. They considered how quality could be maintained when the cost of delivering the service was being reduced.

Officers explained that Planning remained a high priority area for the Council but it was not immune from efficiency savings. Ms Kershaw clarified that KPIs were measured by specific areas that could be monitored in the same way each year. She explained that quality was measured in a different way i.e. through complaints monitoring. 

Members highlighted the KPIs relating to the Museum East Wing project and the High Street Project. It was felt that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 92.

Interview with Georgia Hawkes, Head of Business Improvement

Georgia Hawkes, Head of Business Improvement, introduced the Draft Improvement Plan 2012/15

It was explained that this was a first attempt by the authority at taking a comprehensive approach to governance arrangements as detailed in the Strategic Plan and the Medium Term Financial Strategy.  It was explained that the Draft Improvement Plan detailed the key pieces of work and projects carried out to deliver the council’s priority outcomes and savings.

Members questioned whether the plan was for public consumption, observing that the inhouse performance management system ‘Covalent’ referenced in the plan required a definition. It was felt the plan would benefit from a glossary.

Members felt that the plan provided a good starting point and would provide something from which comparisions could be drawn in the future.

It was recommended that:

a)  A glossary be added to accompany the Draft Improvement Plan; and

b)  The report be noted.

The Committee considered the written update from the Local Strategic Partnership.

The Committee acknowledged that the Locality Boards were at an extremely formative stage.  It was felt that the Committee should keep a watching brief on Locality Boards until they were established.

It was recommended that written updates should be provided to the Committee to keep them informed on the progress of the Locality Boards.

The Committee considered items on the Forward Plan for 1 January to 30 April 2012.

Members agreed that the Committee should revisit the Parish Services Scheme as the Joint Corporate Services and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee. It was agreed that the Committee’s February meeting should be cancelled and the Joint Committee meeting should be arranged in its place. 

The Committee considered its future work programme and agreed to meet as a working group to progress ‘The Council as a Business?’ Review before the next scheduled meeting in March.  It was agreed that the Scrutiny Officer would contact Members by email to arrange a time for the working group to meet.

It was resolved that:

a)  The Committee should meet as the Joint Corporate Services and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 7 February 2012 to revisit the Parish Services Scheme; and

b)  The Scrutiny Officer should liase with Committee Members via email to arrange an informal working group meeting to progress the ‘Council as a Business?’ Review.

6.31 p.m. to 9.09 p.m.