Maidstone council has spoken out to defend its decision to seek a Judicial Review of KCC's "abstraction" of £200,000 intended for Sutton Road mitigation works to finance a feasibility exercise for the Leeds/Langley Bypass.

Chief executive Alison Broom revealed that previously there had been a gentlemen's agreement between the two authorities that neither would give a public statement on the issue - an agreement the borough feels KCC leader Paul Carter subsequently broke by giving a newspaper interview.

When challenged why she felt it right that an issue that could affect all the borough's residents should be kept secret, she said that "fighting out the legal issues on the front page of the Press would not have been appropriate" but now it had become necessary to correct some "inaccuracies" in circulation in some media.

The leader of the council, Cllr Martin Cox (Lib Dem), said he wanted it clear that this was not a political dispute between a Lib Dem borough and a Conservative county authority, pointing out that the decision to seek a Judicial Review had been taken unanimously by the leaders of all five political groups on the borough - including the Conservatives.

Mrs Broom emphasised that far from being anti-bypass, the council was committed in its Local Plan to investigating the pros and cons of a bypass just as KCC wished to do. She revealed that the borough had even offered KCC money from its own budget towards the "modelling" study. Mrs Broom declined to reveal any figures, but said it had been a "substantial" sum. The offer was rejected.

The concern was that KCC had in a statement of common ground to the Local Plan inquiry committed to carry out mitigation works such as junction improvements and improved bus services on the Sutton Road - but using the money for a feasibility study would mean those measures wouldn't happen.

Cllr Cox said that members of the planning committee needed to know that when they granted planning approval subject to mitigation measures that those measures would be carried out. He said it was possible the three major applications along Sutton Road would not have been approved if members knew KCC would renege on the mitigation works.

He added: "It's important that the public's expectation of mitigation works is respected."

Mrs Broom denied allegations that the borough had been deliberately slow in handing over the Section 106 money to KCC, saying the county had been given all the money so far triggered by the developments.

Cllr Cox disputed complaints that no matter who won in court the borough's move would simply waste public funds.

He said it could actually save money, since if the Section 106 money was not used for the purposes set out in the legal agreement, the developers could have a right to reclaim it. Not carrying out the mitigation measures could also put at risk money that KCC had received from the the Government's Local Growth Fund to implement the town's Integrated Transport Strategy.

In answer to a complaint in the Kent Messenger newspaper from Helen Grant MP that she and Helen Whately MP had been kept in the dark about the borough's plans to seek a Judicial Review, Mrs Broom agreed the borough had not informed them, but said that they had known for "months and months" of the borough's concern over the lack of progress in discussions with KCC.

She said KCC had been served with a notification of intent to seek a Judicial Review 21 days before the final decision to proceed was taken. Had KCC responded with a satisfactory reply, no further action would have been taken.

However, she said that the decision to seek Judicial Review had not been taken lightly and a court appearance was not a foregone conclusion. She said: "If we and KCC can bring the matter to a satisfactory conclusion before we reach court, so much the better."

She would not estimate how much a review might cost the taxpayers or how long it might take, saying that would be "just speculation."

KCC is still declining to give a comment.