Agenda and minutes

Members of the committee should declare any interests which fall under the following categories:

a)    disclosable pecuniary interests (DPI);

b)    other significant interests (OSI);

c)    voluntary announcements of other interests.

There were no declarations of interest.

Decision number 22/015 relating to the Folkestone and Hythe District High Street Fund has been called – in.  This report sets out the call – in and requests the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to consider it in accordance with the council’s constitution.

Decision number 22/015 relating to the Folkestone and Hythe District High Street Fund has been called – in.  The report set out the call – in and requests the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to consider it in accordance with the council’s constitution.

Councillors Shoob and McConville outlined the reasons for the call-in.  It was noted that they, and Councillor Fuller, had triggered the call-in because residents needed confidence in the way decisions were made and grants were awarded.  They believed that this decision highlighted some short comings in the process that needed to be addressed, to enable the council to demonstrate rigorous decision making.  They also wanted further information about how the decision was made, particularly in relation to the scoring and comments on the evaluation form (found in appendix 3 of the agenda pack), and they wanted to know what was done by officers to establish how the money would be spent. 

In response to Councillor Shoob and Councillor McConville’s comments, the Leader responded with the following points:

-       The intention of the fund was to promote footfall in the High Street.  The application sought to create more business, which would have promoted increased footfall.

-       This decision was made following the advice of officers, and it was consistent with other decisions that had been made.

-       There was no political angle to the decision, and it was the right judgement based upon the merits of the project.

During consideration of the item, the Committee asked the following questions and made the following statements:

-       What was the standard process, and was that process followed in this case?

-       Who sat on the Panel?

-       What was the justification for the decision considering that the application’s score was fairly low?

-       The amount exceeded 50% of the total project cost, this which would normally only be granted in exceptional circumstances, what were the exceptional circumstances in this case?

-       Was input from Councillor Treloar, the Ward Councillor, considered prior to the decision being made?

-       Why were Panel members given such short notice of the Panel meeting?

-       When and how were declaration of interests made to the Panel?

-       What work was done to review the applicant’s background, and assess how the money would be spent?

-       Could a substitute attend the Panel meeting if a Cabinet Member or a Ward Councillor was unavailable.

-       Did applicants have the opportunity to attend Panel meetings to make representations and answer questions?

-       The notice listed who generally took part in the Panel meetings, including the Cabinet Member for the District Economy.  Below this it detailed that Councillor Wimble, Cabinet Member for the District Economy, had declared an interest, however it did not say that he did not attend the Panel meeting because of his interest.  If this had been made clearer, it could have helped to alleviate some people’s concern. 

-       It appeared that there were three businesses currently in the small premises, the sweet shop, the railway  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.