The huge predicted cost for a council to fight controversial plans for thousands of homes has led to proposed cuts elsewhere, including slashing £100k from its playground budget.

Swale councillors are facing tough decisions when they meet on Wednesday (February 19) to thrash out the authority’s spending plan for the next financial year.

A 12-week public inquiry into the Highsted Park development of 8,400 homes across two planning applications south and east of Sittingbourne begins on March 11.

Swale council, which opposes Quinn Estates’ plans, has set aside what has been described as an “astronomical” amount to pay for legal support with the inquiry.

It has remained tight-lipped about the specific sum involved but it is understood to run into hundreds of thousands of pounds - and is possibly as much as £700,000.

Its planning budget is to balloon by more than £1 million to £1.423m for 2025/26. In comparison, for 2024/25 it was £409,000.

While it is not clear how much of that will go on contesting Highsted Park, documents show that since November last year, the council has identified extra costs linked to planning worth £582,700.

Speaking at a Policy and Resources Committee Meeting on February 5, Cllr Angela Harrison (Lab) said she could not reveal the figure but that it was “an astronomical amount”.

Cllr Monique Bonney (Swale Independents) described it as “an awful lot of money” and blamed “particular actions of the local MP”.

Sittingbourne and Sheppey’s Labour MP Kevin McKenna sparked outrage when he wrote to Secretary of State for housing Angela Rayner asking her to take the decision on Highsted Park out of the council’s hands.

Cllr Bonney said: “We would not be facing such vasts costs - it’s probable they would have been significantly less.

“I have to say that on the record, because it’s our council taxpayers who have ended up footing the bill.

“It’s galling, quite frankly. This rests solely with our elected MP for Sittingbourne and Sheppey and the government, that we find ourselves shelling out these additional costs and the funding situation we find ourselves in.”

The resulting hole in the council’s finances for 2025/26, which were already stretched, could be plugged with more than £400,000 from its reserves.

Other savings being proposed include cuts to the playground budget (£100k), staffing changes (£64k), axing loneliness project funding (£36k) and grants awarded by councillors to community projects (£47k).

Cllr Richard Palmer, one of four councillors to defect from Swale Independents to Reform UK earlier this month, warned the playground proposal would put their future in doubt, with some being forced to shut.

“The more that close, the harder it’s going to be for young families, and I just think it’s short-sighted,” he said.

“If the proposal is approved, a review of playgrounds would be undertaken, and any final proposal would be subject to public consultation…”

“We don’t know how many are shutting and we don’t know where they are.”

Addressing the playground proposal, a council spokesperson said: “There is a proposed savings target of £100,000 in the council’s playground budget, which is subject to approval by councillors when they set our budget for the next financial year.

“If the proposal is approved, a review of playgrounds would be undertaken, and any final proposal would be subject to public consultation before any formal decisions are taken.”

On the amount of money earmarked for contesting the Highsted Park plans, a spokesman said: “We don’t know the full cost of the inquiry at this time, but the council has agreed to set aside the necessary funds to robustly defend the council’s position.”

Mr McKenna dismissed the claim he was to blame for the inflated costs.

He said: “Frankly, this line from the Swale Independents is laughable and I can’t believe they’re trying to pull the wool over residents’ eyes like this.

“I was far from the only voice asking the Secretary of State to call in the Highsted application.

“And even if it hadn’t been called in, there would have been enormous costs to Swale when the application was turned down and the developer then appealed - something that was guaranteed to happen.

“In the case of Highsted, dozens of local residents, businesses and community groups asked for the application to be called in by the Secretary of State and assessed by the Planning Inspector.

“All those people wanted an independent assessment of the developer’s plans and guarantees that infrastructure would be built as well as homes, because they’ve lost faith in the Swale planning committee chaired by the Swale Independents.”

The proposals by Quinn Estates also include a hotel, a new tip, a primary and secondary school, a new M2 motorway junction and the completion of a Southern Relief Road.

Mr McKenna continued: “I added my voice to those requests because I believe it’s the best way to guarantee the development will bring the new bypass Sittingbourne needs, as well as schools and a health centre, if the application is successful.

“But now the council has chosen to spend £700,000 of council tax money to fight the independent planning inspector.

“They themselves have chosen to make significant cuts to council services in order to oppose this development, when Swale could have been well represented at the hearings for considerably less money, all the while trying to pretend that I’m responsible for these costs incurred by their bad choices.”