The Finance, Innovation and Transformation Cabinet Advisory Board met on Monday 8 June 2026, discussing a range of financial and performance-related matters. Key decisions included the approval for the disposal of Cemetery Lodge and noting the RVP investment transactions for January to March 2026. The board also reviewed the Q4 performance summary, complaints data, and treasury, capital, and revenue management reports for the year.

Sale of Cemetery Lodge

The board approved the recommendation to Cabinet for the disposal of Cemetery Lodge, located on Benhall Mill Road. The property, a stone-built building requiring significant repairs, has been part of the council's property portfolio and was previously let out. It is now vacant and has been marketed, with an acceptable offer received that meets the Red Book valuation. Delegated authority was granted to the Head of Property and Estates, in consultation with relevant officers and the Cabinet Member for Finance and Property, to negotiate and agree the terms of the disposal. Mid-Kent Legal Services was authorised to complete the necessary legal documentation. Councillor Matthew Sankey inquired if the disposal had been handled quietly, to which it was confirmed that the property had been on the market for almost a year without public objection. Councillor Ukonna Abasi asked about the historical significance of the building, and it was noted that the building is not listed.

RVP Investment Transactions January to March 2026

The board noted the property transactions undertaken at the Royal Victoria Place (RVP) Shopping Centre between January 1 and March 31, 2026. David Candlin, Head of Economic Development and Major Projects, reported that overall occupancy had improved from 81% to 94%. He also highlighted an increase in footfall of 20% since the council acquired the centre, with nearly 850,000 additional annual visits, bringing it close to pre-COVID levels. Nationally, RVP's footfall rose by 21.5% year-on-year in February 2026, compared to a 5% decline across UK shopping centres. Car park income had also seen an increase of nearly £1 million over the last 12 months. Councillor Christopher Digby questioned the reliance on temporary licences and short-term arrangements, to which Mr. Candlin explained these were often used to protect the council's legal and commercial position while lease renewals were negotiated, and also to maintain flexibility for future redevelopment plans. Councillor Hugo Pound requested that the council communicate more positively about the centre's successes, as there was some public negativity.

Performance Summary Quarter 4

Jane Clark, Head of Policy and Governance, presented the performance summary for Quarter 4 of 2025-26. The report indicated that out of 21 performance indicators, 16 had targets, and all 16 were performing. For two indicators, Quarter 3 data was used due to reliance on Kent County Council for information. Updates on strategic plan projects were also provided, including progress on affordable housing acquisitions, improvements to Hawkenbury Recreation Grounds, completion of Cadogan changing facilities, and ongoing works at Bayham and Hilbert Oast. Councillor Christopher Digby raised concerns about operational pressures over the next 12 months, particularly in light of local government reorganisation, and the sustainability of recycling performance levels. Jane Clark confirmed that for most indicators, data came from the council's own systems, ensuring reliability, and that new software had been purchased to mitigate issues with website analytics caused by bot activity. Councillor Mark Ellis, Cabinet Member for Innovation and Transformation, added that local government reorganisation would be a key focus for the next 12 months, impacting officer time. He also highlighted that the council was the best in Kent for recycling. Councillor Ukonna Abasi noted an overall drop in the target health indicator throughout the year, despite a quarterly increase, and it was agreed that the service would investigate the reasons for this. Councillor Matthew Sankey made a light-hearted comment about trees in relation to the update on tree planting. Councillor Hugo Pound raised concerns about the strategic plan's inclusion of affordable housing acquisitions made before the plan's inception and requested performance data for the farmers' market. He also questioned the origin of performance targets, suggesting they might be set to be easily achievable. Jane Clark agreed to include information on whether targets were national or local in future reports.

Complaints Summary Quarters 3 and 4

Jane Clark also presented the complaints summary for the entire year 2025-26. The council received 318 complaints, with 256 at Stage 1 and 61 at Stage 2. There was one complaint recorded by the Ombudsman, which was not upheld. The report noted an increase in complaints, particularly at Stage 2, with an anecdotal observation of AI use in complaint generation. Planning was identified as a common area for complaints, often characterised by winners and losers. The council responded to 79% of complaints within agreed timescales, exceeding the target of 70%. Of the complaints investigated, 31% were upheld. The most common reason for complaints was not following our processes, highlighting a need for robust staff training. The Ombudsman received 14 complaints, decided on nine, and investigated one, which was not upheld. Councillor Hugo Pound commented on the council's aim to respond to 70% of Stage 1 complaints on time, suggesting the aim should be 100%. He also noted that upheld complaints regarding processes, staff conduct, and communication were quite high (over 50% and 40% respectively), suggesting a need for more than just staff training. Councillor Mark Ellis acknowledged the concerns and stated that the council was looking at improving operational capacity and identifying recurring problems. Councillor Ukonna Abasi expressed satisfaction with the report and the learning points regarding staff training. Councillor Matthew Sankey inquired if complaints about external contractors were included, and it was confirmed they were, provided the council could offer a remedy.

Treasury and Prudential Indicator Management Report Quarter 4

Jane Fineman, Head of Finance, Procurement and Parking, presented the unaudited actual income for interest from investments and bank accounts for 2025-26, which was £2.738 million, an increase of £738,000 from the approved budget. Other interest and investment income was £69,000, an increase of £20,000 from the budget. The bank interest rate fell from 4.5% to 3.75% by year-end. The council achieved an actual interest rate of 4.58% compared to a budget of 4.82%, attributed to additional funds being invested at a lower rate. None of the prudential indicators were breached. Councillor David Osborne inquired about the alignment of the council's investment profile (90% rolling over within 12 months) with other councils in the same unitary authority area. Jane Fineman stated she did not know but confirmed the council outperformed other Kent boroughs in interest earned. She explained that shorter-term investments were made due to anticipated interest rate falls and the upcoming local government reorganisation, as well as managing cash flow fluctuations related to council tax and precept payments.

Capital Management Report Quarter 4

Jane Fineman also presented the capital management report. Cabinet had originally approved £24.9 million for capital expenditure in 2025-26, but the actual expenditure decreased to £14.2 million by Quarter 4 due to additions, deletions, and deferrals. The largest schemes included RVP car park refurbishment (£7.3 million) and the Local Authority Housing Fund 3 (£2 million). New proposed schemes of £4.8 million include £3.2 million for leisure centre improvements, linked to a lease agreement with Serco. Councillor Hugo Pound sought confirmation that Local Authority Housing Fund properties would return to the council in perpetuity as affordable or social housing, and inquired about plans for the remaining £5.7 million of unallocated Section 106 monies. Jane Fineman confirmed her understanding regarding the LAHF criteria and stated that for Section 106 funds, some were allocated to multi-year projects, while others were being actively monitored for allocation before expiry. She noted that unallocated funds might roll into the new unitary authority but would not be lost to the borough as they were collected for specific purposes. She also highlighted that as local government reorganisation approaches, officer time would be diverted, making it more challenging to allocate funds. Councillor Andrew Wallace asked about projected electrical savings from the RVP photovoltaic system, and it was confirmed that the payback period was estimated at 11 years, with potential savings of 40% of RVP's electricity consumption. Councillor David Osborne congratulated the council on a surplus of £3.8 million this year, adding to £3.25 million from the previous year, indicating strong budget management. He also raised concerns about consistent overestimation of income from the RVP shopping centre, questioning reliance on its revenue generation. Jane Fineman clarified that the underachievement was due to delays in Primark's occupation and refitting, not lower-than-expected income. She emphasised the success of RVP in terms of increased footfall and vitality, which indirectly benefited car park income. She also highlighted the need for redevelopment to attract higher-end brands and diversify away from pure retail.

Revenue Management Report Quarter 4

Jane Fineman presented the revenue management report. Unaudited actual expenditure for the year was £14.04 million, £1.62 million under budget, while income was £0.46 million above budget. This included £0.42 million from on-street parking and £0.68 million from off-street parking. RVP shopping centre income was £340,000 below budget, attributed to delays in Primark's opening, though rental income for the year was still £317,000 higher than the previous year. Crematorium income was £357,000 below budget due to a national decrease in death rates and increased market competition. Staff vacancies resulted in savings of £767,000, with half a million meeting the vacancy factor. However, partnership costs led to a small overspend of £15,000 in overall employee costs. Utility bills were £340,000 under budget, and RVP service charges resulted in a £270,000 saving. Business rates from the collection fund were £1.46 million greater than budgeted, with the surplus transferred to reserves for the capital programme. Usable reserves stood at £27.4 million as of April 1, 2025. Councillor Matthew Sankey inquired about the PR2 money, and Jane Fineman explained it was a contractual agreement with Kent County Council for bus lane enforcement, generating a surplus of £2.934 million. This surplus has been allocated to projects including a £1.8 million photovoltaic system for the RVP car park, £50,000 for Kent Wildlife Trust rewilding, £3,600 for trees in Dunorland, and £11,000 for a new electric vehicle for the parking team. Councillor Hugo Pound commended the report but expressed concern about the language used to describe underspends and the significant reduction in staff numbers across various services, questioning preparedness for local government reorganisation. He highlighted planning as an area with a £200,000 staffing underspend. Councillor Ukonna Abasi echoed concerns about staffing gaps impacting current service delivery. Jane Fineman acknowledged the recruitment challenges, particularly in planning, but noted improvements in her own teams. She stated that revenue services were prioritised to maintain service levels, with the capital programme often suffering from slippage due to staffing shortages. Councillor Andrew Wallace asked about projected electrical savings from the RVP photovoltaic system, and Jane Fineman confirmed they were looking into this and would provide details. Councillor David Osborne congratulated the council on a £3.8 million surplus for the year, adding to £3.25 million from the previous year, demonstrating strong budget management. He also raised concerns about the consistent overestimation of income from RVP shopping centre. Jane Fineman clarified that the issue was a time lag in expected income, not lower-than-expected income, and that the centre's redevelopment was crucial for attracting higher-end brands and diversifying beyond retail. Councillor Mark Ellis indicated he would explore a strategy for managing human resources through the transition.

Urgent Business

There was no urgent business to discuss.

Date of the Next Meeting

The next meeting was scheduled for Monday 6 July 2026.

The meeting concluded at 8:12 pm.