Agenda item

1.    Mr Oakford introduced the draft report for discussion as to its further development before it was presented to the Cabinet for consideration ahead of the 30 November meeting. It was said that the Kent Communities programme aimed to rationalise KCC’s physical estate and propose a greater mix of alternative methods of service delivery across the county in face of the Council’s significant financial pressures.

2.    In response to questions and comments from Members it was said that:

a)    The cost of the consultation process was approximately £40,000. The headline cost of the Programme was included in the report and an updated figure would be provided ahead of the decision being considered by Cabinet.

b)    Further information regarding the redevelopment of the Ray Allen South Ashford Centre would be provided to Members outside of the meeting.

c)    It was said that youth would have better access to support services through the introduction of the Family Hubs than that offered by the current Youth Hub provision. The Family Hub Programme team would be able to provide further information regarding the cessation of the commissioned youth contracts and expected impact of this.

d)    Service delivery could be undermined by the condition of the Council buildings should they not undergo the required maintenance. The Kent Communities Programme was intended to put the Council in a better position to address the maintenance issues with the current Council estate.

e)    It was highlighted that the Kent Communities Programme sought to achieve savings for the Council while providing the right services, in the right way for Kent communities. While delivering savings was a key driver for the programme, the usage of the Council’s buildings had been reviewed using the Needs Framework to understand both demand and need for services.

f)     Regarding concerns raised in relation to the lack of sufficient information on the projected savings created by the Kent Communities Programme, Mr Oakford assured Members that Cabinet would be held accountable should the savings not be delivered. He confirmed that the capital receipts from the disposal of Council buildings would be reinvested into the maintenance of the remaining estate.

3.    Following the debate, the Chairman put to the vote the recommendations set out in the report and the voting was as follows:

For (7)

Mr Dendor, Mr Barrington-King, Mr Bartlett, Mr Chard, Mr McInroy, Mr Rayner, Mr Thomas

Against (5)

Ms Dawkins, Mr Hook, Mr Lehmann, Mr Stepto, Dr Sullivan

Abstain (2)

Mr Bond, Mrs Prendergast

4.    RESOLVED to endorse the proposed decision to:

a)    Consider and note the feedback from the Kent Communities Consultation on the proposals, as well as responses to the Family Hub Consultation, insofar as they are relevant to the Kent Communities proposals, alongside the amended policy and financial position set out in the report ‘Securing Kent’s Future;’

b)    Consider the options as set out in the decision report and confirm an option to be implemented including agreement of:

                                          i.    The network of buildings to be utilised to support the delivery of following services:

·         Open access youth and children services – including Public Health

·         Adults with Learning Disabilities

·         CLS – Adult Education

·         Gateways

                                        ii.    The decommissioning of services at those buildings which are no longer to be utilised to support the delivery of the services outlined above.

                                       iii.    The co-design of outreach services with partners.

c)    Approve expenditure from capital budget to enable adaptations to the agreed network of buildings in order to facilitate the co-location of multiple services;

d)    Delegate authority to the Corporate Directors of Children Young People & Education (CYPE), Growth Environment & Transport (GET), Deputy Chief Executives Department (DCED) and Adult Social Care & Health (ASCH) to design the staffing model to support the changes as agreed in part b of the decision above, undertake the necessary staff consultation and implement any changes as a result; and

e)    Delegate authority to the Director of Infrastructure, in consultation with the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance, Corporate and Traded Services, to enter into the necessary contracts and legal agreements to facilitate the implementation of the decisions.