Visitors and members of the public who are unfamiliar with the building and procedures are advised that:

(a)      The fire alarm is a continuous loud ringing. In the event that a fire drill is planned during the meeting, the Chair will advise of this.

(b)      Exit routes from the chamber are located on each side of the room, one directly to a fire escape, the other to the stairs opposite the lifts.

(c)      In the event of the alarm sounding, leave the building via the nearest safe exit and gather at the assembly point on the far side of the car park. Do not leave the assembly point or re-enter the building until advised to do so. Do not use the lifts.

(d)      Anyone unable to use the stairs should make themselves known during this agenda item.

The Mayor outlined the emergency evacuation procedure.

To approve the Minutes of the Annual Council Meeting held on 14 May 2025 (Minute Nos. 1 - 15) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Annual Council Meeting held on 14 May 2025 (Minute Nos. 1-15) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Mayor as a correct record.

Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their families or friends.

The Chair will ask Members if they have any disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) or disclosable non-pecuniary interests (DNPIs) to declare in respect of items on the agenda. Members with a DPI in an item must leave the room for that item and may not participate in the debate or vote. 

Aside from disclosable interests, where a fair-minded and informed observer would think there was a real possibility that a Member might be biased or predetermined on an item, the Member should declare this and leave the room while that item is considered.

Members who are in any doubt about interests, bias or predetermination should contact the monitoring officer for advice prior to the meeting.

No interests were declared.

The Mayor thanked Members for their support since she started her term as Mayor in May 2025 and advised that along with her Deputy Mayor, Councillor Derek Carnell, they had carried out around 30 engagements including the Bobbing in Bloom awards, and the opening of the Sheerness Adventure golf course.

Referring to her first charity event held recently at Shurland Hall, Eastchurch, the Mayor thanked Members for their support.

To consider any questions submitted by the public.  (The deadline for questions is 4.30 pm on the Wednesday before the meeting – please contact Democratic Services by e-mailing democraticservices@swale.gov.uk or call 01795 417330).

There were no questions from the public.

To consider any questions submitted by Members.  (The deadline for questions is 4.30 pm on the Monday the week before the meeting – please contact Democratic Services by e-mailing democraticservices@swale.gov.uk or call 01795 417330).

There were no questions from Members.

The Leader said:

“Good evening Madam Mayor, one and all.

I want to start this evening firstly by affirming this Council’s unerring commitment to the White Ribbon campaign. Having recently received re-accreditation as a White Ribbon organisation, we stand united in our pledge to end male violence against women and girls. This is not just a campaign we support passively, it’s a commitment that shapes our policies, our culture, and the way we engage with our communities. We are working closely with partners, including schools, charities and our own staff, to promote healthy relationships and challenge misogyny wherever it appears and I would encourage you all to sign the pledge to never use, excuse or remain silent about violence against women. Whilst white ribbon day will be held on 25 November this year, the principles of the white ribbon campaign is something that we can all live by overtly every single day by word act or demeanour in our role as community champions.

Moving on we recently saw a vibrant and inclusive Pride Month, with events bringing people together in a spirit of joy, solidarity and equality. Pride is not just a celebration it’s a reminder of our responsibility to ensure that everyone, regardless of gender or sexuality, feels safe, seen, and valued in our communities. In particular I want to thank the organisers, volunteers, and participants for making the Swale Pride event in Sheerness so meaningful. I would also like to thank our Mayor and Deputy Mayor for attending the event in their civic role and enduring some of the not so tropical weather that the Sheppey can bring. However I am sickened to have to report that Pixie Polite one of the artists that appeared at the Swale event was subjected to a nasty homophobic attack in London earlier this week. I am sure that I speak for us all in stating that this Council remains firmly committed to LGBTQ+ inclusion and will continue to champion equality in all that we do including condemning acts such as these.

Remaining on the Island and reflecting on the lighter side of local life I was delighted to attend the opening of the new Adventure Golf facility at Beachfields, which I am sure will prove a hit with families, residents and visitors of all ages. This facility is part of our wider work to improve leisure and recreation, helping people connect, unwind, and enjoy our outdoor spaces.

Just down the road we are Supporting Young Entrepreneurs as work begins to transform the garages at the historic Masters House into dedicated business workshops.

This exciting project will see the old garage roofs removed and replaced with three modern, sustainably built ‘makers huts’, complete with kitchenettes and toilets. These new workspaces are designed to give local artists, makers and craftspeople aged 18 to 30 a professional base to launch and grow their businesses.

We are working in partnership with national charity Launch It, who are already delivering outstanding mentoring and business support  ...  view the full minutes text for item 242.

Councillor Lee-Anne Moore read out the motion on the lack of Secondary School Places on the Isle of Sheppey, as set out in the Agenda pack. She said there were still 15 children currently without a secondary school place, and she spoke of the impact the uncertainty over school places had on both pupils and their families, including on mental health and parents giving up work to support their children. Councillor Moore said despite many meetings, the situation remained unresolved and she predicted the lack of school places would increase due to the amount of additional housing development planned for the Isle of Sheppey, but no additional schools.

Councillor Moore referred to the criteria over the ‘two mile catchment area’ for schools, pointing out that as an Island, the furthest point was six miles away from a secondary school. She urged support for the motion and said the issues urgently needed to be addressed.

As the original seconder was not in attendance, Councillor Peter Marchington seconded the motion and spoke of the unfairness of the allocation of schools.

Members were invited to speak and raise points, which included:

·         Spoke in support of the motion;

·         referred to the Kent Education Commissioning Plan and said it needed an urgent refresh as the figures were inaccurate and were being used to suit the circumstances of individual organisations, and without reviewing properly now there would still not be enough school places in the future;

·         hoped to meet with Isle of Sheppey KCC Councillors to sort the inaccurate education plan;

·         there needed to be more communication from KCC with SBC Members and officers so that increases in schools places could be planned for;

·         highlighted the improvement at the Sheppey School and said all Sheppey children should be able to access a place at the school;

·         welcomed national Government intervention if KCC could not improve the forecast and availability of school places;

·         spoke of how the system incentivises schools to offer additional places to pupils when over capacity;

·         there was a financial impact on schools where pupils had been allocated a place in accordance with the catchment area, but were realistically too far away and could not take up the place;

·         hoped KCC would listen;

·         allocation of school places had been an issue for many years, and never properly addressed;

·         a new school was planned at Kemsley Fields, Sittingbourne to be opened in 2024 and work had not even commenced;

·         housing was agreed too often without the promised infrastructure;

·         there was no requirement for London Councils who sent families to live in Kent, to inform KCC that there would be additional pressure on the education service;

·         the current situation was as a result of repeated failures by Government and the previous KCC administration;

·         the Secretary of State for Education needed to review the service;

·         called for the Sittingbourne and Sheppey MP to raise the issue in Parliament;

·         was concerned at KCC’s lack of interest and urgency in addressing the issue;

·         the problems might have been inherited  ...  view the full minutes text for item 243.

In proposing the motion as set out on the Agenda, Councillor Charles Gibson said the actions proposed were simple and presented no costs to the Council. He referred to recent announcements from KCC and said it was important that SBC reaffirmed its commitment to the LGBTQ plus community and for young people to have appropriate access to education and information. Councillor Gibson highlighted a recent incident that showed how important it was for SBC to reaffirm their support, and he thanked Councillor Ben J Martin for seconding the motion in Councillor Perkin’s absence.

Councillor Ben J Martin seconded the motion and reserved his right to speak.

Members were invited to speak, make comments and ask questions and these included:

·         Sought clarification that the support did not include funding;

·         supported freedom of speech;

·         said the announcement from KCC had inadvertently drawn attention to the fantastic range of books about the LGBTQ plus community that were available in libraries;

·         KCC did support the LGBTQ plus community but the books were simply moved to a more age appropriate area of the library;

·         pointed out that books were displayed at the entrance of the library as it was Pride month;

·         if young people were unsure of who they were and parents wanted to help, it was the parents’ right to have access to literature that could assist;

·         libraries were spaces for learning, exploration and community and should reflect the people they served and provided access to stories that helped individuals feel seen, understood, and respected;

·         censorship by politics had no place in libraries;

·         children deserved access to a wide range of identities and experiences;

·         the motion sought what should already be expected, a public commitment to freedom of expression, inclusive education, and support for age appropriate, diverse content in our libraries;

·         censorship did not make difficult topics disappear, it drove them into silence and stigma;

·         questioned at what point did it become detrimental to keep pointing out differences in people?;

·         we needed to be celebrating all people in all capacities all the time; and

·         supported the motion but considered KCC had bigger issues to face and needed to focus on the issues residents had voted for them to be represented.

The seconder of the motion, Councillor Ben J Martin, said it was clear that every individual should feel respected and included, and libraries should respect diverse people and provide comprehensive education. He added that every individual might learn and absorb information from a book at different ages. Finally, Councillor Martin urged KCC to start doing business through debate at meetings and not using Press Releases.

The proposer of the motion thanked Members for their comments.  He acknowledged the comment from a member of the Reform UK group that KCC and Reform UK did support the LGBTQ plus community and asked that they reflected on whether their tone and behaviour had made that clear to their LGBTQ plus employees and residents in Kent.

Resolved:

That Council:

(1)  Called on Kent County Council to reaffirm its  ...  view the full minutes text for item 244.

The Leader introduced the report and advised that the topic had been considered by the Community and Leisure Committee in December 2024 and at the Policy and Resources Committee in March 2025. He proposed the recommendation which was seconded by the Deputy Leader. The Deputy Leader referred to the lengthy consultation that had taken place.

Resolved:

(1)  That the charge of £15 per vehicle per night at Shingle Bank, Minster (including the areas of green opposite), and Shellness Road, Leysdown as recommended by the Community and Leisure Committee and the Policy and Resources Committee be agreed.

The Leader introduced the report which sought to agree to undertake a Community Governance Review (CGR) in Swale and to agree the configuration of the steering group. He proposed the recommendations.

At the request of the Mayor, the Chief Executive clarified the timing process of setting up the steering group and the timeline of actions for carrying out a CGR as set out on Appendix A. The Chief Executive advised that the steering group meetings could take place in the evenings, on days and times that suited the members of the group, to encourage inclusivity.

In seconding the recommendations, the Deputy Leader reserved his right to speak.

The Mayor invited Members to speak and comments included:

·         Supported local-decision making;

·         the review was not about empire building but opening the door for sensible conversation;

·         some areas might benefit from having their own local voice but to ensure value for money, needed to be careful there were not too many Parish Councils;

·         the review was about giving residents a choice;

·         a thorough consultation was essential;

·         welcomed the benefits that some efficient Town or Parish Councils brought;

·         there was a danger of losing a sense of place in the borough, particularly in unparished areas, when unitary Councils were set up;

·         Sittingbourne needed a Town Council;

·         Faversham Town Council was a good example of what a Town Council could provide;

·         having a ‘local voice’ was essential as Local Government was changing;

·         review was long over-due;

·         the advantages and the costs of additional Parish Councils should be made clear;

·         drew attention to paragraph 2.3 on page 13 of the Agenda pack, that the review could rectify existing issues;

·         the public would have the final say and should be listened to;

·         the steering group could consider the introduction of ‘Community Councils’; and

·         for those inactive Parish Councils, residents should be able to decide if they wished for them to continue.

Councillor Angela Harrison proposed an amendment that the steering group be more politically balanced and the largest group, the Labour group, should have three Members sitting on it. The amendment was seconded by Councillor Hayden Brawn and on being put to the vote, was agreed.

Members continued to debate the amended motion.

The Deputy Leader said he agreed with an all options review led by residents’ feedback, and any proposals that came forward should be from residents, based on their needs. He said several wards and communities had overlapping areas and it was the steering group’s role to make sure the relevant discussions took place.

Resolved:

(1)  That a Community Governance Review be undertaken in Swale.

(2)  That the configuration of the Steering group be three Labour, two Conservatives, two Swale Independent Alliance, one member each from the Liberal Democrat Group, Reform UK Group and Green Group, plus the unaligned Independent member.

The Leader proposed the recommendation to note the report which was seconded by Councillor Lloyd Bowen.

Resolved:

(1)  That the objectives set for the Chief Executive for the year 2025/26 be noted.

In introducing the report, the Chair of the Planning and Transportation Policy Working Group (PTPWG), Councillor Charles Gibson, advised that it had already been considered at other Committees and he paid tribute to Planning Policy and Democratic Services officers for the quick turn around in changes to plans and minutes from other Committee meetings in order for it to be considered by Full Council, so that the timetable could be commenced. Councillor Gibson said it was not the desired timetable but repeated restraints by Government and others outside of the Council had led to the way forward to achieve a Local Plan as quickly as possible.

Councillor Gibson referred to the protection and benefits that would be achieved from a Regulation 18 consultation, whilst using the current model,  acknowledging it was not ideal, as outlined in the recent letter received from the Council for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE). Finally, he referred to the delays in the Highsted Park planning appeal and changes in planning legislation that had significantly set back the process.

In seconding the recommendation, the Vice-Chair of the PTPWG, Councillor Brawn supported the Chair’s comments. He reminded Members that recommendations had been approved unanimously at PTPWG and the Policy and Resources Committee previously.

Members were invited to speak and raised points including:

·         Agreed with the Chair and Vice-Chair’s comments;

·         referred to the call-in of the Highsted Park planning application and the difficult position it had left the Council in;

·         speculative planning applications could be submitted for many years to come;

·         the outcome of Highsted Park might not be known for more than a year after the inquiry commenced; and

·         clarity sought on documents and timelines contained within the report.

There was a discussion on timelines in the report and a Member considered pushing the date from December 2025 to January/February 2026 for the Regulation 18 draft local plan consultation, would cause an unnecessary delay and December 2025 was achievable. In response, the Chair of the PTPWG advised that as officers were also heavily involved in the Highsted Park appeal inquiry, there was a lack of resource to meet the December 2025 deadline. He reminded Members the dates had been agreed at the PTPWG  and Policy and Resources Committee meetings earlier that month.

Members continued the debate and made points including:

·         Welcomed a commencement date for the Regulation 18 consultation and for discussions of policies that could be included;

·         none of the options were palatable and SBC were being held to ransom by developers;

·         had concerns there would be further delays to the timetable;

·         the proposal meant the Council remained vulnerable for another year;

·         the delay and outcome of Highsted Park appeal were unknown;

·         the delay to the Regulation 18 was not in the Council’s interest; and

·         referred to discussion at the Highsted Park inquiry around policy wording and ongoing debates, and urged for focus on policy wording so it was more effective.

Councillor Monique Bonney proposed that the key dates in the original timeframe as set  ...  view the full minutes text for item 248.

Resolved:

(1)  That the decisions made by the Urgent Decisions Committee at its meeting on 27 June 2025 be noted.

The Chair of the Standards Committee introduced the report and proposed the recommendation which sought to extend the appointments of the current Independent Persons to September 2029. The Monitoring Officer clarified that there was no prejudice to any future authority in the extension of the contract, should the current timetable of SBC moving to a unitary authority go ahead.

Councillor Baldock said there needed to be wider debate on the appointments which were important positions. Councillor Bonney questioned whether long-standing appointments were best value.

The Monitoring Officer clarified the role was to provide guidance to all in the Standards process.

During the closed session, Councillor Mike Baldock proposed an amendment to the recommendation which he amended to the following when in open discussion:

“To establish a mechanism to consider whether to seek to widen the opportunity of the panel of people that would be interested in standing to be an independent person on the Standards Committee.”

Before it was seconded, the Monitoring Officer advised that since the existing contract of the current independent persons was due to end, it was unlawful for the Council to be without at least one Independent Person.

Councillor Wise suggested the current contracts be extended whilst the opportunity to widen to others was explored.

Councillor Bowen supported the suggestion made by Councillor Wise, and sought clarification on the word ‘mechanism’ in the amendment as said it was not clear.

Councillor Bonney sought clarification on the extension of the contract and highlighted the inflexibility of making changes within the agreed contract time.

Councillor Bonney then amended the recommendation to the following:

“That the current contract of the existing Independent Persons be extended to one year, and the Standards Committee review the mechanism of recruitment in order to broaden the scope to appoint future independent persons.”

The amendment was seconded by Councillor Wise and on being put to the vote Members agreed.

Resolved:

(1)  That the period of appointment of Patricia Richards and Christopher Webb as Independent Persons be extended for a further one year to September 2026 and the Standards Committee review the mechanism of recruitment in order to broaden the scope to appoint future independent persons.

To decide whether to pass the resolution set out below in respect of the following item:

That under section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3.

1.    Information relating to any individual

2.    Information which is likely to reveal to the identity of an individual

3.  Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

Resolved:

That under Section 100 (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Schedule 12A of the Act:

1.    Information relating to any individual

2.    Information which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual

There was no discussion on the exempt appendix.

Members did not discuss any information within the exempt appendix.

There was an adjournment from 8.25 pm until 8.35 pm.

At 10 pm, Members agreed to the suspension of Standing Orders in order that Council could complete its business.