Date of meeting: 25 September 2025

A maximum period of fifteen minutes in total shall be made available at each meeting of the Executive for questions from Members of the Council.

The questions included on the list of questions referred to above shall be taken as read at the Cabinet meeting. The question will be answered either orally or at the discretion of the Chair by a written answer circulated after the meeting. Officers may assist the Leader or a Cabinet Member with technical answers to questions. No supplementary questions shall be permitted.

The following written questions have been received from Members:

(1) Councillor Meadows- The King Alfred Leisure Centre Regeneration Project

What's the predicted car parking numbers and revenue? Will the car park be smaller or larger than current provision?

(2) Councillor Meadows- The King Alfred Leisure Centre Regeneration Project

How much will it cost residents and visitors to use the King Alfred facilities?

(3) Councillor Meadows- The King Alfred Leisure Centre Regeneration Project

How confident are you that your borrowing costs vs your projected income will match or could this be another i360?

(4) Councillor Hill- Local Government Reorganisation

Could you explain how the administration came to the figure of £52.4m in annual net benefits from your Local Government Reorganisation proposal? What was the total cost of reorganisation before factoring financial benefits? Other analysis by the County Councils Network suggested that Councils needed to be at least half a million to make any savings so I'm keen to understand where this disparity comes from.

(5) Councillor Hill- Local Government Reorganisation

Falmer lies in Lewes Parliamentary constituency and is being proposed to be included in the new Brighton & Hove unitary. If the purpose of bringing Peacehaven, East Saltdean &

Telscombe Cliffs into a larger Brighton & Hove City Council is to align Parliamentary constituency boundaries, then this seems contrary to that purpose. Could you explain what appears to be a contradiction in aims? There are also concerns about splitting up current district council boundaries which this does.

(6) Councillor Shanks- The King Alfred Leisure Centre Regeneration Project

Can we be assured that the Administration will achieve affordable and social housing on the site?

(7) Councillor Shanks- The King Alfred Leisure Centre Regeneration Project

Will you require the Administration to present the full, combined scheme — leisure centre and housing — together, so that the public can properly understand its effect on the promenade, sea views, skyline, and seafront character before any further approvals are granted?

(8) Councillor Shanks - The King Alfred Leisure Centre Regeneration Project

What will be the total cost of the new leisure centre factoring in interest charges, and possibly compound interest charges for possibly 3 decades? how will this be met , will other projects need to be abandoned?

(9) Councillor West - Local Government Reorganisation

LGR is proving to be a textbook example of how not to bring forward change. The case for LGR was not proven by the Government but predicated on a partial report by the County Councils Network, adopted without question into the Government’s manifesto. The cabinet report states the scale of indicative savings over ten years are ‘fairly marginal’ compared to the growing cost pressures faced by authorities, yet transition would create colossal unfunded upfront costs; estimates of which could prove wildly understated when competing nationwide for delivery capacity resources. There seems no appetite for re-organisation amongst the public, who wish to retain local identity and democratic decentralisation, while preferring Government funding be committed to restore and expand services. Given the relevant Ministers have departed post, now is the moment to call for a moratorium of this hasty, unwelcomed, yet significant upheaval. Does the Cabinet agree?

(10) Councillor West - The King Alfred Leisure Centre Regeneration Project

Given the huge financial and service delivery uncertainties created by the Government’s LGR initiative, coupled with the council's increasingly perilous financial position, would it not be prudent to pause investment in major sports facilities until we know what communities will be being served and to see what means the council will have to meet the on-going financial commitment.

(11) Councillor McLeay - Rough Sleeping & Single Homeless Services Commissioning

Having seen Change Grow Live (CGL) in action, I’ve been impressed by the quality and consistency of their service. As the commissioning process opens to tender, could you outline the specific criteria that prospective providers will need to meet – not just in terms of value for money? How will you assess their ability to deliver trauma-informed, person-centred care to achieve meaningful outcomes for those rough sleeping?

(12) Councillor McLeay - Rough Sleeping & Single Homeless Services Commissioning

While the recommissioning of the Street Outreach Service rightly considers financial sustainability and value for money, how will the Council ensure the quality of service? What mechanisms will be in place to ensure providers deliver a quality service, especially those with multiple compound needs?

(13) Councillor McLeay- Brilliant Brighton Business Improvement District (BID) – New Ballot

Given that the Council does not have formal representation on the BID Board, how will it ensure transparency and accountability in how BID funds are spent, and priorities are set?

(14) Councillor McLeay- Brilliant Brighton Business Improvement District (BID) – New Ballot

What role will the Council play in overseeing the ballot process and ensuring that the BID Operating Agreement reflects the interests of both levy payers and the wider community?

(15) Councillor McLeay- Brilliant Brighton Business Improvement District (BID) – New Ballot

Will the Council publish the baseline service levels for city centre maintenance and safety, so businesses can clearly see what additional value the BID is providing?

(16) Councillor McLeay– Greater Brighton Economic Board – Admission of New Member to the Board

What specific contributions, beyond representation, will the Chamber make to the Board’s work programme? What resource commitment has been proposed that the Greater Brighton Economic Board sees as adding value?

(17) Councillor McLeay– Greater Brighton Economic Board – Admission of New Member to the Board

How will the Board monitor whether the Sussex Chamber’s representation genuinely reflects the diversity of Sussex’s business community, including micro-businesses, minority-owned enterprises, and social enterprises?

(18) Councillor McLeay– Greater Brighton Economic Board – Admission of New Member to the Board

What reasons did constituent authorities state for not agreeing an amendment to the Heads of Terms? It would seem their concerns were overruled. Is there a contingency plan if one or more constituent authorities later raise further objections to the amended Heads of Terms?