Agenda and minutes

1.1       The Chair noted that, due to being held via Microsoft Teams because of a facilities issue, the meeting was being held on a non-statutory basis. The resolutions of the Committee would therefore be formally agreed at its next meeting.

1.2       The Committee RESOLVED to agree the minutes of the meeting held on 20 March 2025 as a correct record.

2.1 There were no apologies for absence.

Disclosures by all members present of personal interests in matters on the agenda, the nature of any interest and whether the member regards the interest as prejudicial under the terms of the Code of Conduct.

3.1 There were no disclosures of interests.

Notification of items which the Chair considers to be urgent and proposes to take at the appropriate part of the agenda. Any members who wish to raise urgent items are asked, wherever possible, to notify the Chair before the start of the meeting. In so doing, they must state the special circumstances which they consider justify the matter being considered urgent.

4.1       There were no urgent items.

5.1       The Deputy Chief Executive introduced the report which starts the Committee’s consideration of the budget setting process. The report provides an opportunity for the Committee to look back at the Council’s performance through the year end Quarter 4 Council Monitoring report, and a look forward via the State of the County report. The report asks the Committee to identify areas of interest or focus, and where it would like further information as part of its RPPR work and work programme.

5.2       The Chief Finance Officer outlined in more detail the Council’s financial position which projected a deficit of £36.5m for 2026/27, reduced to £24.6m if Council Tax were to increase by 5%. He explained that, going forward, the 5% Council Tax increase will be included as core spending within the medium term financial plan, as the Government have made this assumption in the recent funding reviews and reforms. He also set out the significant challenges that the Fair Funding Review presents for East Sussex County Council, including changes to the formulae which will redirect adult social care funding from elderly to working age adults. He highlighted that despite an increase in relative need in East Sussex, the Council would be unlikely to receive an increase in funding, due to council tax equalisation.

Use of reserves

5.3       The Committee discussed the use of reserves and asked why it had been necessary for the Council to rely heavily on reserves to cover the budget deficit for the last couple of years. The Chief Finance Officer, explained that the need to use reserves was driven largely by increasing need in the county for statutory services, particularly in Adult Social Care and Children’s Services. This increasing need had not been met by a proportionate increase in funding, and that the Government had not yet put forward long-term solutions for SEND provision and home to school transport. The Fair Funding Review could result in ESCC adult social care funding decreasing, due to the national shift towards funding for working-age people, whereas the bulk of adult social care spending in East Sussex is on older adults, particularly over-85s.

Savings process

5.4       The Director of Communities, Economy and Transport (CET) noted that savings had been made for many years, which in CET alone had been worth about £40m in the last decade. The ability to continue make savings has therefore become more difficult and would require examining all service costs in detail in order to be identified. The Deputy Chief Executive added that there were tight spending controls in place including a weekly recruitment sign-off process, and purchase order spending over £1,000 being examined by senior officers.

5.5       The Committee commented that the Council would have to be mindful of the needs of the new unitary authority when considering proposals as part of the RPPR process for future years. Cllr Collier commented that his preference was that if further savings were being made this year, they should be focused on universal services to avoid savings with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.1       The Chair introduced the report which outlines future items for the Place Scrutiny Committee. The Committee discussed potential areas of interest for addition to the work programme.

6.2       The Committee noted that Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) accidents are higher in East Sussex than the national average and asked if this was linked to issues with cats’ eyes and road markings, and requested a future report. The Director of CET clarified that there is no evidence to suggest that cats’ eyes are linked to KSIs. He noted that most accidents are associated with behaviour, such as driving under the influence of drink or drugs and speeding, and there is a process in place whereby the police inform ESCC if they believe the issues with the road is a factor in an incident.

6.3       The Committee considered streetworks as a potential review topic, including the process for permitting road closures, diversions and communications and engagement with the public about the reasons for road closures. The Director of CET agreed this may be a helpful area for the Committee to consider so that Members better understood the process and could communicate this to residents, as road closures are often unpopular but necessary.

6.4       The Committee requested an update report on SPACES and asked if this could be considered as part of the update on property assets. The Chief Operating Officer suggested that the Committee could receive a SPACES report at their meeting in either November 2025 or March 2026. This report was last considered in March 2024 and could be combined with the asset management report to brief members about combining and making best use of public resources.

6.5       The Committee asked when it would receive an update on the Council’s current approach to the use of AI. The Chief Operating Officer suggested that the Committee could receive a briefing in autumn.

6.6       The Committee RESOLVED to:

1) Agree the agenda items for the future committee meetings;

2) Add streetworks to the work programme and conduct a scoping meeting for a potential review; and

3) Agree to re-form the Local Transport Plan 4 reference group, for a briefing session on the Local Transport Plan 4 request assessment process.

7.1       The Assistant Director of Operations, introduced the report on East Sussex Highways Performance, which summarises the performance of the contract through the second year (2024/2025) in achieving the contract Service Performance Indicators (SPIs) and outcomes. These outcomes were set prior to awarding the contract to Balfour Beatty Living Places (BBLP) and were focussed around: quality assurance; value for money; stakeholder management; sustainable economic growth; and carbon reduction. Year 2 performance is much improved on Year 1, against the same 17 SPIs and 6 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), even with higher targets, but there is still scope for improvement in most areas. The report focussed on areas with improvement plans in place, which directed the contractor to address specific areas of concern and continue to deliver value for money and a continuously improving service to the residents of East Sussex.

7.2       The Head of Highways, presented the report. The report showed more stabilised contract performance for Y2 than in Y1. The contract is delivered under East Sussex Highways, in partnership with BBLP, so the indicators measure the performance of the contract itself, not the contractors. He added that East Sussex Highways continuously review organisational and business processes to streamline service requests. The contract contains two incentives for good performance: a reward model based on SPI performance for each service year; and the possibility of the 7-year contract extension if KPIs are met or exceeded. The Contract Director for BBLP added that BBLP took a continuous improvement approach and while there was a high bar set to achieve KPIs, including 100% compliance to reach ‘green’ status against some indicators, he was hopeful that they could be achieved.

7.3       The Committee asked why some targets are set a 100% compliance, as this seems out of reach in practice. The Assistant Director Operations responded that the targets were set by a previous Scrutiny Committee, and noted that in some situations, a high target is appropriate. If Members felt the targets were inappropriate then they could be reviewed to assess their suitability. Some members commented that the KPIs and SPIs were well defined and thought that the contract had been well negotiated.

7.4       The Committee discussed the role of highways stewards and whether there were issues associated with relying on highway stewards who were employed by BBLP in raising defects with BBLP’s work. The Committee noted that local stewards seemingly seemed to change often and asked whether there could be more consistency as this would improve communications with councillors. The Assistant Director Operations responded that the model of reporting through stewards employed directly by BBLP worked well and is appropriate, as it improves efficiency and shortens the time between a customer reporting an issue and resolution. He acknowledged that the changing of stewards could make maintaining continuity of communications for Members difficult, but that they would not want to limit the career progression opportunities for staff given that stewards hold a relatively junior role and may want to move upwards.

7.5       The Committee discussed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.1 There were none.