Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no declarations of interest made in accordance with the Code of Conduct.

However, in the interests of openness and transparency the following Members informed of membership of the organisations set out below applying for community enhancement funding:

Councillor Mrs S Spence (Chairman) – Tonbridge Town Team and Community Garden

Councillor D Trice – Tonbridge Baptist Church

Councillor D Keeley – Snodland Town Council

To confirm as a correct record the Notes of the meeting of the Communities and Health Advisory Board held on 2 June 2014

RESOLVED:  That the notes of the meeting of the Communities and Health Advisory Board held on 2 June 2014 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Decision Notice D140106MEM

Members gave consideration to the bids received from Parish Councils and Community Groups in relation to the current funding round of the Community Enhancement Fund.

Information regarding two additional revenue supported bids to be included as part of Appendix 4 was tabled.  It was reported that the total amount to be awarded based on the recommendations set out in the report was £219,885.  There was a total of £260,976 currently remaining within the fund which left £41,091 unallocated.

Members expressed concern regarding those capital bids that had been unable to demonstrate any match funding for projects (Appendix 3), particularly the level of support proposed by the Borough Council.    Although Members recognised the importance of assisting local groups and projects, for the benefit of the community, it was also considered important to ensure consistency and fairness when offering financial support and encouraging organisations to take ownership of funding arrangements. 

RECOMMENDED:  That  

(1)         the bids set out in Appendices 2, 4 and 7 to the report be supported in full;

(2)         the bids set out in Appendix 3 to the report be deferred until the next meeting of the Advisory Board so that it could be clarified with the organisations what level of funding contribution they could make.

(3)         the bids set out in Appendix 5 to the report be rejected; and

(4)         the bids set out in Appendix 6 to the report be supported in partnership with the Tonbridge and Malling Seniors Forum who wished to allocate £1,000 towards these projects.

Consideration was given to the report of Management Team on awarding Kent Savers an unconditional grant of £10,000 to enable the organisation to offer support and loans to those in need within the Borough.  It was noted that the unconditional grant could be funded from the Welfare Reform Reserve.

The report made particular reference to State Aid Regulations and set out the various options available to the Borough Council.

Members supported the proposal in principle but considered that more information from Kent Savers was needed regarding the current ‘take up’ by residents of the Borough and the future benefits to those residents.   In addition, further clarity was sought on the legal position regarding subordinated loans and unconditional grants. 

In response to a question about promotion of the service within the Borough, Members noted that some Kent Districts had previously provided specific revenue funding to Kent Savers in order for targeted campaigns and ‘outlets’ to be progressed in their areas.  Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council had not previously provided revenue funding for more targeted work.

Members expressed the view that if, in due course, a grant were to be awarded consideration should be given to seeking an understanding from Kent Savers that a targeted promotional campaign within Tonbridge and Malling would be undertaken.

RECOMMENDED:  That a decision regarding financial support be deferred until the next meeting of the Advisory Board to enable further investigation with Kent Savers into the following issues:

(1)         further information on how the residents of Tonbridge and Malling would benefit;

(2)         consideration as to whether consultation with local churches would be beneficial; and

(3)         further clarity surrounding the legal position

The Chairman to move that the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting during consideration of any items the publication of which would disclose exempt information.

There were no items considered in private.