Medway details 15-year on-street EV charging concession

A Gateway 3 procurement report presented to Cabinet on 4 August 2026 recommends awarding the contract following a competitive tender. The published report does not name the preferred supplier because its identity and commercially sensitive information are contained in an exempt appendix.

The proposed contract would begin on 1 September 2026 and run for 15 years, with an option to extend it by a further 12 months. The council estimates the commercial value of the arrangement at between £2 million and £30 million, while the project itself has a £2.14 million budget funded through the Local Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (LEVI) programme.

Supplier-funded model shifts much of the delivery risk

Under the proposed concession, the operator would finance, install, operate and maintain the charging infrastructure. Medway describes the model as supplier-funded, with the operator taking responsibility for much of the investment and operational risk rather than the council purchasing and operating the network directly.

The published report says all compliant bidders assumed full use of the council’s £2.14 million LEVI allocation and that the recommended bid remains within the available funding envelope. It also states that no additional council capital or revenue funding is expected to be required for the contract.

For local authorities, this type of arrangement can reduce the immediate funding burden and transfer responsibility for long-term operation to a specialist provider. The trade-off is that commercial and technical decisions made at procurement stage can remain relevant for well over a decade.

Price carries the largest single evaluation weighting

Medway’s evaluation split is particularly useful for anyone involved in public charging procurement. Price accounted for 40% of the total score. Site selection and charging specification carried 20%, programme governance and delivery 15%, operational delivery and resourcing 15%, and social value 10%.

That does not mean the contract was awarded simply to the lowest-cost bidder. The published report does not disclose the detailed commercial scoring method, and 60% of the available score related to non-price criteria. Even so, commercial terms represented the largest single element of the assessment.

For a contract that could remain in place until 2042 if the extension is used, the weighting raises a wider procurement question: how should councils balance immediate commercial value against charger quality, reliability, maintainability, software support and the ability to adapt the network as vehicle and charging requirements change?

Long-term concessions make lifecycle detail important

A 15-year charging concession is fundamentally different from buying a set of chargers as a one-off capital project. Hardware may need replacement or major refurbishment during the term, communications technology will change, payment requirements can evolve and charging demand may look very different by the end of the agreement.

The published report identifies risks including grid constraints and contractor performance, but the commercially sensitive appendix means the public document cannot answer every lifecycle question. Details such as equipment replacement obligations, performance guarantees, revenue-sharing arrangements and the treatment of technology upgrades will depend on the final contract.

Supplier identity remains confidential

The procurement report recommends moving ahead with the award, but the preferred supplier is not identified in the public papers reviewed by EVCP Info. Until the council publishes the final award and supplier identity, the most useful part of the announcement is therefore the procurement structure rather than the operator itself.

For charging-sector suppliers and local authorities, Medway provides a useful example of how LEVI-backed infrastructure is increasingly being delivered through long-duration commercial concessions rather than straightforward equipment purchases.