A local authority is to raise its portion of council tax by the maximum allowed without having to call a referendum - 2.99%.

It means households living in an average Band D home in Maidstone will this year pay £301 towards the services provided by their borough council.

The tax bill landing on people’s doormats in April will also include elements for Kent County Council, Kent Police, Kent Fire and Rescue and Adult Social Care, which together will take the Band D bill to £2,357 a year.

Those living in the smallest properties - Band A - will be charged only £1,571.

However, those in the largest Band H properties will face a bill of £4,715.

In addition, those living in a parished area will pay an added precept, which is set locally.

This means that Band H households in two villages - Bredhurst and Headcorn - will end up paying more than £5,000 a year in council tax.

At the Maidstone council budget meeting last week, there was no argument about how much the borough should put up its council tax - the 2.99% increase is the maximum increase permitted without seeking permission from the public through a referendum.

However, there was a debate over how the council’s money should be raised and spent, with three amendments proposed to the budget strategy put forward by the Green/Lib Dem administration.

The first amendment came from the Conservative group leader Cllr Claudine Russell. She was opposed to the council’s plan to increase its revenue by hiking off-street parking charges by 15%.

She said the increase, predicted to add £157,000 to the council’s coffers, would fall unfairly on rural residents who had to use their cars to reach the town, and warned it could deter visitors and harm town centre shops and businesses.

To offset the loss of income, she suggested axing the borough’s plans to hold two Citizen’s Assemblies at a cost of £100,000, doing away with plans for a parish council conference, saving £5,000, and cancelling a sum of £50,000 which the council intends to put aside to develop an “integrated transport strategy” for Maidstone.

She said there was little point to the latter, since with the imminent local government reorganisation, the borough would be abolished before anything could be achieved.

She also advised the council did not proceed with the creation of a new post for a nature recovery programme officer - saving £55,000.

Overall her amendments would have generated a surplus of £53,000 which she suggested adding to the council’s housing budget to help achieve its aim of providing 1,000 affordable homes.

However, council leader Stuart Jeffery (Green) said Maidstone had not put up its parking fees since 2019, and since then prices generally had risen by 25%.

He said: “This authority has been subsidising drivers at the expense of others for too long.”

Cllr Clive English (Lib Dem) argued: “There is no evidence that raising parking charges affects the number of visitors to the town.”

Cllr Lottie Parfitt (Con) disagreed, saying the increases “would accelerate the decline of our high street,” while Cllr Gary Cooke dismissed the planned Citizens’ Assemblies as “another talking shop.”

Cllrs Russell’s amendment failed, with 17 voting in favour and 26 against.

The next amendment was proposed by Cllr Paul Harper (Fant and Oakwood Ind).

He was also opposed to spending money on a parish council conference and on the Citizens’ Assemblies. He pointed out that of the £50,000 cost for each assembly, £44,000 was to be paid to consultants to organise them.

Instead, he proposed spending the £105,000 saved on better street cleaning.

He was supported by Cllr Fay Gooch (Ind) who described the Citizens’ Assemblies as “overkill and a complete waste of money.”

But Cllr Clive English argued that reallocating the money to street cleaning would achieve nothing since the council was already unable to recruit sufficient staff to fill its existing budgeted headcount.

The amendment was lost with 17 in favour and 26 against.

Undeterred, Cllr Harper tried again.

He was concerned the council was pushing back plans to start on the development of a new leisure centre at Mote Park.

He said that following the imminent local government reorganisation it was unlikely such a project would be a top priority for whatever unitary administration emerged.

He therefore wanted the council to keep to the original timetable to ensure that work on the centre was at least well underway before the council was likely to be abolished in 2028, to make it more likely that the project would be continued. He wanted a new centre built by 2031.

Cllr Russell agreed, asking: “Don’t we want to be ambitious for Maidstone?”

But Cllr Kathy Cox (Green) said the council had recently allocated £2.5m for improvements to the existing centre which were working well, with visitor numbers up.

The centre was generating a surplus of £138,000 in revenue a year over maintenance costs, and the indications were that a new centre would not be needed until at least 2032. It was safe to defer plans, she said.

Cllr Harper’s amendment was lost with 16 in favour and 27 against.

The council then voted on the administration’s original proposals.

They were approved with 28 votes in favour and 15 against.

Those voting against included all the Conservative councillors present in the chamber, plus Cllr Patrick Coates (Fant and Oakwood Ind) and Cllr Ann Dawes (Ind).

After the meeting, Conservative Cllr Tom Cannon reflected his party’s view.

He said: “I am greatly disappointed at the direction of travel this new administration is taking our town.

“They have ended the car parking freeze put in place by the previous Conservative administration to support local businesses and encourage visitors to the town.

"To have the freeze glibly described as a car subsidy by the council leader tells you everything you need to know about this new Green and Lib Dem administration.

“We need to support our town centre businesses and we obviously should not be making a visit to Mote Park more expensive."