A Green-led council administration has been accused of “playing fast and loose” with taxpayers’ money after costs to make its buildings more environmentally-friendly soared.

Cllr Claudine Russell, leader of the Conservative group on Maidstone council, made the accusation after the Green/Lib Dem coalition was obliged to “pause” its showcase decarbonisation project in the face of rising costs.

The scheme was to decarbonise the council’s offices at Maidstone House in King Street and at the Link building next door.

It planned to do so by replacing the gas heating system with air-source pumps, improving the buildings’ insulation and glazing, and adding solar panels to the roof.

When the project was first mooted in February it was estimated to cost £3.775 million - the vast majority of which (£3.13m) would come from a government grant.

However, by the time the council’s cabinet came to approve the expenditure at its meeting in July, new consultants had been employed and had submitted a new cost estimate of £5.85m.

With no increase in the government grant, that meant the council would need to contribute £2.72m of its own money instead of £648,664.

The council has a general investment rule that any investment expenditure ought to yield a return of 5%.

However, based on the council’s own estimated savings in energy costs that would arise from the decarbonisation project, the higher project costs meant the project would only yield a return of 1.9%.

Nevertheless, cabinet members, meeting on July 26, agreed to go ahead.

The council granted itself planning permission for the work on October 17 and then put the scheme out to tender.

But when the deadline for bids expired, those received were all in excess of even the council’s higher cost estimate.

The council issued a statement saying it was now “assessing the challenges of carrying out this major project”.

It said: “Rather than proceeding immediately with the work as originally planned, it is intended to consider all the options available to the council.

“A report will be brought to councillors at the December meetings of the Climate Transition, Corporate and Environmental Services Policy Advisory Committee and then to the following Cabinet meeting.”

Cllr Russell, along with Cllrs Lottie Parfitt (Con) and Paul Harper (Fant and Oakwood Independents) had attempted to stop the cabinet’s decision in August by calling it in for review by the council’s overview and scrutiny committee, but the committee backed the cabinet’s decision.

This week, Cllr Russell said: “I have been concerned about this project for a while now.

“I called it into overview and scrutiny because the administration wanted to spend nearly £3m on top of the £3.1m government grant.”

"The leader even referred to the project as a no-brainer..."

“At the previous cabinet meeting, no discussion was had, just a quick agreement based on a thin report to spend the extra money.

“I reasoned that at that time, the project had a rate of return of 1.9% falling far beneath the 5% target.

“Costs had not even been finalised at that stage when the administration agreed to take it forward and I queried where the priorities should lie.

“I reasoned that other projects might have been more appropriate and asked whether they had considered other uses for the money (Some councillors suggested that it should be used to invest in more social housing).

“Ultimately I was out-voted, and the Green Leader, Stuart Jeffery, even referred to the project as a ‘no-brainer’.”

Cllr Russell added: “I’m glad to see that the project has been paused, but it would be nice to be listened to now and then as the Green administration plays fast and loose with taxpayers’ money.”

Cllr Jeffery said: “We remain committed to delivering the council’s biodiversity and climate change agenda, including the decarbonisation of our own buildings.

“Pausing to consider carefully our options enables us to assess the most practical and cost-effective way of delivering those projects.”

He added: “The cost of materials and the demand for retrofit is skyrocketing, making decarbonisation harder and more expensive for everyone, so it was right to pause our project.

“There needs to be greater support from national government if we are all to adapt for the future and reduce our carbon footprint.

“We will now need to look at alternative schemes.”

The £3.13m grant from the government has to be spent by March 31, next year, or the council will lose it.