Agenda item

Report of the Cabinet Member for Finance

The Cabinet Member for Finance reminded the Committee that the original general revenue budget for 2018/19 had been approved by Council on 1 March 2018 and had been set at £17.161m.  Budget adjustments had taken place throughout the year and as at 31 December 2018 the budget had been amended to £19.353m. This was due to a number amendments being approved during the year.  These were outlined in the table under 3.1 of the report.

The surplus forecast at Q2 which the Committee had received notice of at its’ last meeting had been allocated and was detailed in the table at 3.3 of the report.

In particular, business rates growth and s31 grants had been increased by £459k in order to offset the increase to the growth budget for the additional business rates income allocation.  This was broken down as £149k for one-off expenditure, £50k for small business grant and £260k for priority growth projects in 2018/19.  The Reserves and Grants budget had been increased to reflect one-off funding changes between quarters 2 and 3, such as redundancy costs.  The Regeneration Reserve showed a transfer to reserves of additional business rates income for use in future years. 

The Committee was informed that the overall forecast was a break even position as at 31 March 2019. 

The Cabinet Member then referred to the Housing Revenue Account and how the original budget for 2018/19 had been set at a surplus for the year of £6.668m. This budgeted surplus had been transferred to the reserves in order to provide additional internal funding for the HRA capital programme. The budget had been adjusted during the year to allow for budget virements, the creation of set-asides and centralisation of key budget headings. The forecast surplus had now reduced to £5.987m which resulted in a forecast overspend of £518k. Further detail in respect of the HRA monitoring statement could be found at Appendix C of the report. 

With regards to the Capital programme, the original capital budget for 2018/19 had been set at £14.839m but the budget had been adjusted during the year due to projects being identified which meant the updated position was £25.478m.  Amendments had been Budget carry forwards, grounds maintenance vehicles, St Peter’s Hill Public Realm and property acquisition.  Further detail could be found in the table. The capital budget now had a forecast underspend of £6.285m which reduced the requirement to use £3.81m of reserves during the financial year.  It was anticipated that requests to carry forward the underspent budgets and associated funding to 2019/20 would be considered at the outturn of the financial year. 

Members discussed the benefits of the Business Rate Pilot and how funding would be allocated, the good position the HRA was in and how this would enhance the possibilities of borrowing for social housing, whether it was normal practice to amend the budget proposals and the underspend in respect of commercial investment spending and the issues and risks.

Members were reminded that the budget documents were living documents that required flexibility in order to accommodate changes throughout the year.

Further discussion ensued on recruitment and staffing, whether the staffing figures included the costs of restructuring; the £24K overspend on staffing budgets and how staffing budgets were compiled; whether staffing budget figures could be recorded for individual departments rather than as an overall figure; the guidelines, process and sign off by Strategic Directors in respect of seeking agency / temporary staff, whether the figure of £800k arising from the senior management restructure was the final figure or whether it would increase and whether the noted pension costs would be recurring.  In addition Members queried the outcomes from shared working specifically with Rutland Council.  Members requested that they were provided with a Staffing Budget figure for the Council as a whole rather than for separate departments.

As previously mentioned, the Communities and Wellbeing OSC would be asked to consider the Disabled Facilities Grant underspend.

Members also queried when car parks and tariffs throughout the district would be reviewed noting that each town had its own requirements.  A further query was raised in respect of the figure noted for the provision of bad debt and how this was calculated.

Action Point:

That the Strategic Director for Resources provides Members with a breakdown of staffing costs for departments.

Conclusion:

The Growth Overview and Scrutiny Committee noted the contents of the report.