Issue - meetings

The Principal Democratic Services Officer introduced the report, with the Committee asked to consider the call-in request received against the decision made by the Cabinet, shown respectively at Appendices 1 and 2 to the report. The options available to the Committee were outlined.

Councillor Russell outlined the reasoning for calling-in the decision. The issues raised were that:

• The decision was made at Cabinet on 24 July 2024 with no comment made by Cabinet Members. The report was felt to be thin, particularly in explaining why notional return was 1.9%, less than the Capital Strategy current target rate of return of 5%;
  
  
• The costs had increased by £1.545 million (41%) with little justification. Paragraph 4.2 stated that further work was required to obtain definitive costs and there were concerns this could increase further;
  
  
• The original report did not advise where the additional £2.074 million of Council contribution would come from; and
  
  
• There was no information on potential alternative allocation of the money.

The Chairman read a statement from Councillor Forecast as he was unable to attend as a Visiting Member.

The Cabinet Member for Climate Transition and Nature Recovery was invited to address the Committee, and stated that:

• The Net Zero pathway document was approved by Cabinet in July 2023 including carbon dioxide emission reduction of 362 tonnes within a total Carbon Dioxide equivalent of 800 tonnes. The Council applied and received Salix funding of £3.13 million to be spent by March 2025 on Maidstone House, which comprised of 40% of Council emissions, and the Link;
  
  
• In the past six months, the Council have been firming up design details, reviewing technical aspects and liaising with planners over elements of the building visibility. The updated costs, following consultation with construction consultancy, Calford Seaden, were mainly attributed to necessary changes to cladding and waterproofing; and
  
  
• This project would not only set a good example for other Councils, but savings would be made in maintenance and replacement costs as well as energy savings. It would also make the building more attractive to future potential tenants.

The Leader of the Council was then invited to address the Committee, and stated that:

• Decarbonisation of Maidstone House and the Link would provide the Council with an important asset, and it would not detract from other housing projects, which already had a large amount of funding set aside. The Leader urged the Committee to consider that the grant money from Salix would be lost if it were not spent by March 2025.

The Director of Finance, Resources and Business Improvement addressed some of the queries arising from the call-in and stated that:

• Although the return was lower than 5% at 1.9%, the Capital Strategy allowed exceptions where there were overriding Strategic Priorities, as was the case with this project; and
  
  
• There was £15 million over 10 years within the Capital budget to fund spending on decarbonisation with just over £3 million profiled for this year. This was expected to cover the Council’s contribution.

During the debate, several Members  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45