Agenda item

To consider the report of the head of finance (to follow).

The committee considered the head of finance’s report.  This brought together all relevant information to allow Cabinet to recommend to Council a revenue budget for 2018/19 and a capital programme for 2018/19 to 2022/23.  The Medium Term Financial Plan (MFTP) was included, which provided details of the forward budget model for the next five years.  The report also recommended the prudential indicators to be set by the Council in accordance with ‘the Prudential Code’, introduced as part of the Local Government Act 2003. 

Councillor Robert Sharp, the Cabinet member for finance, introduced the report. Also present to answer questions were William Jacobs, head of finance, Simon Hewings, strategic finance manager and Richard Spraggett, chief accountant (Capita).

Councillor Emily Smith had registered to speak at the meeting. In response to her questions, it was reported that:

·         Revenue growth bid CSVR1: This was a one-off bid to fund feasibility studies and exploratory work on the installation of electric charging points.

·         Revenue growth bid DAHR1: These were the additional costs associated with the council hosting the Oxfordshire Growth Board, including support staff. The council would be host for 12 months from July 2019, which was why a proportion of the cost extended into the following year

·         Capital programme, Abbey Meadows toilet block: Details of this expenditure were included in the previous year’s budget.

In response to members’ questions, it was reported that:

·         West Way capital receipt: The West Way receipt had not yet been allocated so was funding the capital programme, reducing the borrowing requirement at this time. Potential leisure investment projects in the Botley area were under review with a report anticipated in 2018/19.  Consideration would also be given to a suitable investment opportunity should one arise.

·         Budget adjustment, reduction in West Way rent: The rental income was approximately £600,000 p.a. but the budget had already been reduced in the previous year to reflect the closure of some units.  The figure for 2018/19 and future years reflected the final position following the sale completion.

·         Budget build change CLIR1: A review of ongoing internal IT costs had revealed that costs of approximately £111,000 p.a. had been removed incorrectly from the budget when the 5 councils’ partnership contract went live.  This provision corrected the error.

·         Budget build change CMTR1: This was one-off expenditure to meet the new requirements of the General Data Protection Regulations. If the feasibility work determined that new IT hardware was required, the additional costs would be included in future budgets.

·         Budget build change DAHRE2:  The flexible homelessness grant funding had already been received and was in reserves.  The Syrian refugee grant funding would be received in 2018/19.  A budget was required in order to spend the funding already received.

·         Budget build change CMTR2: The Data Protection Officer post would be shared with South Oxfordshire District Council.

·         Budget build change CMTR3: This was the estimated cost of the senior levels of the management restructure as agreed by Council and the restructure of the client team which was out for consultation at the present time.

·         Budget build change: WLERE4: A bid for an additional £10,000 for tree surgery had been included at the request of the head of service.

·         Revenue growth bid LEGR1: This bid had been brought forward to meet the ongoing increased demand for external legal support on planning inquiries and court and tribunal proceedings, including judicial reviews and appeals.

·         Revenue growth bid PLAR2: The Didcot Garden Town (DGT) grant has funded the work of the DGT team to date. This bid covered the costs associated with the council, as planning authority, producing a DGT Development Plan Document.  If the bid were approved then further details could be circulated to members.

·         Revenue growth bid WLER4: This bid would create an in-house team to work with parishes to provide improvements to the environment. The bid was in response to requests from the parishes.

·         Planning revenue budget bid: This bid related to a specific change in Government policy that permitted a 20% increase in planning fees. It was a requirement that this increase must deliver additional planning related resources so could not be used to offset previously approved expenditure.

·         Appendix D1: Concerns about slippage did not relate directly to the budget but rather to the delivery of the capital programme. In response to a previous request from the committee, the budget outturn report was to be amended to include a column setting out the reasons for the slippage above £50,000 on any capital scheme.

·         Staff resources: A growth bid for additional staff resources required to meet the requirements of the organisation had been included in the budget.

A member requested that the summaries for growth bids should provide more detail. The head of finance reported that the summaries were submitted by the relevant head of service. Where summaries were brief this was generally due to the information being commercially confidential or proposals being subject to formal consultation.

Some members expressed the view that part of the £250,000 p.a. proposed expenditure on parish environmental improvements would be better spent on implementing the currently unfunded air quality action plan. Accordingly, the following motion was moved and seconded.

To recommend that Cabinet reconsiders the revenue growth bid WLER4 and reallocates some of the £250,000 p.a. proposed expenditure to implement the air quality action plan.

On being put to the vote, the motion was lost.

RESOLVED: To note the draft revenue budget 2018/19 and the capital programme to 2022/23.