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

(a)    No fire drill is planned during the meeting.  If the alarm sounds please leave the building quickly without collecting any of your possessions, using the doors signed as fire escapes, and assemble outside where directed.

(b)    Await instructions before re-entering the building.

(c)    Anyone who requires assistance in evacuating the building should make officers aware of any special needs so that suitable arrangements may be made in the event of an emergency.

The Chair outlined the emergency evacuation procedure.

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 Head of Environment and Leisure Services introduced the report which summarised the procurement process and its results and sought the Committee’s approval of the recommended contractor.  He highlighted the timeline of events as set out in the report.  Cabinet agreed in June 2021, that the Council would remain within the Mid-Kent Waste Partnership (MKWP); the tender process for the new contract went live in November 2021, with four robust stages; the Extraordinary Environment Committee in August 2022 approved a contract extension until March 2024, following bidders raising issues of price increases and difficulties in sourcing the fleet of vehicles in time; and the new contract would now commence on 24 March 2024.  He added that the MKWP, after an extensive process, proposed to enter into a contract with Company A for eight years.

The Head of Environment and Leisure highlighted the large number of positive initiatives included in the bid from Company A, as set out in paragraph 3.3 of the report.  He said the contract would put significant pressure on the Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS).  If the contract was agreed by the Environment Committee, further decision on funding the vehicle fleet would be considered at the Extraordinary Policy and Resources Committee and Extraordinary Council meetings on 4 January 2023.

Members were invited to make comments and ask questions on the open report, as below:

·         This was a clear and well-presented report and showed there had been a robust process in place;

·         wished to thank officers for their hard work;

·         disappointed that there was only one bidder;

·         concerned that the loss of collection of textiles and batteries could result in these items being added to the green bin;

·         acknowledged the positive aspects of the new contract;

·         it was difficult to make constructive comments on the contract as Members had not been privy to all the conversations;

·         difficult to comment on depot recommendation;

·         considered paragraph 4.5 in the report summed up that there was no other choice but to accept the appointment of Company A;

·         with a lack of bidders and any competition, there was no incentive for Company A to provide the best price;

·         batteries could end up causing damage to the refuse lorries;

·         more clarification needed on ownership of the fleet of vehicles and any risk to the Council;

·         considered the fleet should be made up of electric vehicles (EVs);

·         the new contract looked more reliable and environmentally friendly than the current contract;

·         this was a fragile time for contracts in the current cost-of-living crisis;

·         it was not helpful that Kent County Council (KCC) were changing where waste was being tipped, meaning that refuse/recycling was being tipped in one place and food waste at a different site;

·         Central Government could do more to aid further carbon reduction;

·         there were many positive aspects to the contract;

·         proposed improvement in street cleansing was commendable;

·         there was a risk in borrowing money for this contract, more detail was needed;

·         there would be a cost implication if contractors were used if there  ...  view the full minutes text for item 546.

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 item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3.

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

4.         Information   relating   to   any   consultations   or   negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relationsmatter arisingbetween theauthority ora Ministerof theCrown and any employees of, or office holders under, the authority.

Resolved:

That under Section 100A(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 involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 3 and 4.

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

4.         Information   relating   to   any   consultations   or   negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relationsmatter arisingbetween theauthority ora Ministerof theCrown and any employees of, or office holders under, the authority.

The meeting was held in closed session at this stage so that discussion on the exempt appendices could go ahead.

The Head of Environment and Leisure introduced the confidential appendices which provided information on the financial implications and a breakdown of pricing in comparison to alternative models including breakdown of fleet funding costs.

Members made the following comments:

·         The Council wanted an improved contract, which was a priority, and so it was necessary to accept that it would cost more money;

·         there needed to be a clear explanation why the Council could not operate the waste contract through a Local Authority Controlled Company or a Direct Service Organisation (in-house);

·         Members were not aware of how the figures in the appendices were arrived at, and this was important in making their decision on the contract;

·         clarity was needed on where the garden waste would be taken to;

·         sought more information on the location of Company A’s depot;

·         was Company A aware that the Council was buying the fleet of vehicles?;

·         concerned with the increased costs of the contract;

·         considered income could be generated for the Council from the other two options; and

·         concerned with the risk of the Council owning the vehicle fleet.

In response, the Head of Environment and Leisure explained that an external consultant, together with the Director of Resources, the Interim Head of Finance and Procurement and himself had scrutinised the figures and he outlined how they had been arrived at.  He referred to the Cabinet report for June 2021 which went into detail on the two alternative options.  He said that, after following advice from the Monitoring Officer, some generic information on the two options could be sent to Members.  The two other options would mean that the Council would be ‘doing it alone’ and would not have the resilience that would be in place if Company A had the contract, and this would mean the risk of non-delivery would increase.

The Head of Environment and Leisure said that the bidders were advised at the start to provide information for both the Council and the contractor providing the vehicles.  Following discussion with the bidders in the competitive dialogue sessions, the MKWP made bidders aware in the final stage that the Councils would buy the fleet.  The fleet would include all the vehicles required for the waste and street cleansing service.  He explained that garden waste would be taken to Church Marshes in Sittingbourne, then on to Blaise Farm in West Malling, with KCC being the disposal authority.  He was unable to give any details about the location of the depot as this would identify Company A, but confirmed it met all of the required criteria and would not impact operations/staffing.

The Head of Environment and Leisure said that all local authorities had seen increased costs and he considered Company A offered a good value contract, and the Council could not do it any cheaper.  The Environmental Services Manager added that at the moment there was uncertainty within  ...  view the full minutes text for item 548.