Rother council gives up seat on Sea Change Sussex board citing ‘reputational damage’

At a full council meeting on Monday (March 7), Rother councillors voted not to appoint a successor to Liberal Democrat cabinet member Kevin Dixon, who resigned from his position as a director of the regeneration company last month. 

The council had been due to vote on appointing a replacement for Cllr Dixon, but instead backed an amendment calling for the position to be left unfilled “until such time as that person is able to represent the best interests of the company without compromising the values of this council.”

Moving the amendment, Cllr Dixon said: “Having been on the board for over two years I have felt that the reputational damage to myself and to the council of being associated with Sea Change is just too great.

“The lack of progress on key projects and the constant disagreements of the three local authorities mean in my opinion that the company is not achieving its aims.”

He added: “Surely the concept of a regeneration company of which three councils are constituent members should mean that the company works in tandem with those authorities. 

“The reality is that Sea Change is in constant conflict with all three authorities and the regeneration aims and objectives of all parties are severely compromised as a result.

“It is the officers’ recommendation to continue as a member of Sea Change primarily due to the companies’ significant development landholdings in Bexhill. In a personal capacity, I believe that being associated with Sea Change no longer serves the regeneration aims of this council.”

Cllr Dixon went on to criticise Sea Change’s handling of a number major projects, most notably the significant delays to the Queensway Gateway Road scheme and the conflict surrounding the Bexhill Enterprise Park North project (which saw an RDC planning decision overturned at appeal).

He also criticised the regeneration company’s voting arrangements, arguing that the shared 19.9 per cent vote share of RDC, Hastings Borough Council and East Sussex County Council meant these authorities had “virtually no influence” over decision making.

The amendment received unanimous support from councillors, including the Conservative opposition group.  While supported there were calls for the council’s scrutiny process to examine the situation in more detail in the near future. 

Despite this decision, the council will retain a part ownership of the company and could take up its seat at any time. 

Cllr Dixon’s comments saw criticism from Sea Change, however.

A spokesman for Sea Change said: “Contrary to his portrayal, Sea Change Sussex is fully committed to regeneration in the Bexhill, Hastings and Eastbourne area and has a good track record of delivering projects — often despite hurdles posed by the planning and regulatory processes.

“In Bexhill alone, we’ve developed the Glovers House offices — which are fully occupied by a large local employer — two roads to improve local traffic journeys, and more recently the High Weald House offices, to which we’re busy attracting companies to bring employment to the area.

 “We’ve also successfully attracted private sector investment to Bexhill, with a private developer set to create 84,000 sq ft of industrial premises on the Bexhill Enterprise Park North, which will be able to support up to 500 jobs. 

“This project suffered severe delays as the developer was initially refused planning consent for the scheme by Rother District Council, but we persevered for the sake of local employment and are pleased the Planning Inspector concluded the council had acted wrongly in refusing permission to our private sector partner.

“Despite these delays, the private developer is now working to bring forward this scheme in parallel with our construction of the site roads and related infrastructure — underlining our continued commitment to the economic regeneration of Rother.”

The spokesman went on to defend the board’s voting arrangements, saying they had been designed from the start to ensure the company would not be “local authority-influenced”. This had been agreed by the councils at the time, the spokesman added.

The spokesman said: “It’s a shame that we won’t have a Rother member at our next board meeting, as it means the district council will inevitably have less input in guiding our programme, which is substantially focused on Bexhill. 

“But we’re happy to talk further to the council and hope to welcome a new Rother board member in the near future.”

Huw Oxburgh , Local Democracy Reporting Service