Agenda item

Purpose: To receive an update on actions following the previous Committee.  

The Committee considered a report providing the information requested at the previous meeting (Agenda Item 4).

Policy and Communication Budget

Information was provided as requested at the last meeting, when concerns were raised that Policy and Communication were delivering budget underspends year on year.  It was noted that the majority of savings consistently came from freezing posts, with examples provided for four posts in 2010/11.  These posts had been deleted with effect from 1 April 2011. 

A view was given that as the decision to freeze posts was taken early in the year then perhaps not all the posts were necessary.  A concern was added that this was inflating the budget unnecessarily with a view to using savings to offset overspends elsewhere. 

(Councillor David Goff joined the meeting at 6.35pm).

The post of Economic Development Officer had been filled on a secondment since June/July 2010 to the end of the financial year.  There was some concern expressed that this post would not be continuing, particularly in the current economic climate.  Further information was requested on the saving delivered from this post as it was only frozen in the first quarter and whether a saving had been made from the seconded member of staff’s substantive post. 

Andy Walker assured Members that there was a business case for each of these posts and there was no unnecessary budgeting.  This would continue to be the case for future budget discussions. 

It was suggested that the post of Civil Contingency Officer became less of a need when relevant plans and policies had been produced.

Legal and Electoral Service Budget

This had been added to the work programme for discussion at a future meeting.

Corporate Property Asset Management Plan (AMP)

The valuations of properties listed in the Asset Register were based on existing use and not open market value.  Andy Walker explained that this was not an issue when/if the Council sought to borrow money as this would not be done against existing assets.

It was believed that a property holding needed to be of a certain value for it to be considered.  It was agreed that this amount would be requested.

The potential for the timings of condition surveys and valuations to be linked was being considered.

It had been advised that further detail on disposals could be provided on request, but had not been included in the AMP.  Members felt that detail should be included in the AMP for properties where disposal was under consideration.  It was agreed that this view would be communicated to the Head of Property and Public Protection and Portfolio Holder for Property. 

An update was requested on whether the Asset Register could be appended to the AMP. 

The potential to remortgage properties/release equity was queried last time and Andy Walker advised that there were no restrictions to enter into such an arrangement.  There would however need to be reasons for doing so and, while all financing streams were explored, this was not seen as the best financial option available.  It was the Council’s policy to acquire properties freehold as this was felt to strengthen the balance sheet and making mortgage rather than rental payments was seen as preferable. 

Releasing capital in this way was not felt to be necessary for the Council as the Public Works Loan Board saw local authorities as a secure third party to loan money to. 

Property Contracts and Contractors in Schools

The Committee noted that the need for the potential issue of a school building being allowed to fall into disrepair being added to the Risk Register was being progressed.

Q2 Financial Performance Report

The Q2 report was received by the Committee at the last meeting prior to Executive as an exception and it was queried whether it would still be approved by the Executive.  Andy Walker advised that he had discussed this point with the Portfolio Holder and the Chief Executive and it was not felt necessary to take the Q2 report to the Executive.  The Q3 report was due to be discussed at the March meeting of the Executive. 

It was pointed out that a benefit of the Committee discussing the Q2 report could have been the potential for comments to be forwarded to the Executive for when they discussed the report.  Andy Walker agreed to forward comments made by the Committee to the Executive when Q3 was discussed. 

Andy Walker advised that guidance had been received with regard to the capitalisation of highways revenue expenditure and detail on the outcome of this would be clearer in the Q3 report.  Andy Walker added that he would also discuss this with the Portfolio Holder and Shadow Portfolio Holder. 

Car Park Budgets

Members raised a number of points/questions in relation to the information provided on car park budgets.  These were as follows:

·                    The cost increase between 2008/09 and 2009/10 was expected due to the employment of Civil Enforcement Officers, but the additional income generated as a result was not sufficient to increase the net surplus to the required level.  An increase in income was also expected from the raised tariff, but this was given as a potential reason for the forecasted income failing to materialise. 

·                    Comparison with previous years was difficult to analyse due to the number of variables and it was suggested that this could be aided by a more detailed breakdown of income and expenditure to help identify budget trends. 

·                    Another reason for the forecast income not materialising was given as the closure of some Newbury Town Centre car parks and it was felt that an understanding of the number of car parking spaces available over recent years would help with analysis.  The impact of the recession was noted as a further reason for the shortfall.

·                    Questions were also asked as to how the budget was actually decided.  The level of income was expected to rise between 2009/10 and 2010/11, but the tariff was unchanged and the same number of tickets were expected to be sold.  It was also pointed out that the percentage increase in the expected budget in recent years did not appear to be in line with the increased charges which had a higher percentage increase.  A view was given that this was poor value for money. 

·                    Whether the current charges would be retained in 2011/12.  However any increase could reduce ticket sales as already indicated.

It was agreed that the Head of Highways and Transport would be asked to provide further detail on the above points in advance of the next meeting to allow Members the opportunity to request more information if required.  This information would then be discussed in detail at the next meeting with the Head of Service invited to attend. 

RESOLVED that:

(1)       Further information would be requested on the savings found in Policy and Communication as a result of freezing the post of Economic Development Officer.

(2)       The minimum value of a property holding would be requested. 

(3)       The Head of Property and Public Protection and the Portfolio Holder for Property would be informed of the Committee’s view that detail should be included in the AMP for properties where disposal was under consideration. 

(4)       An update would be requested on whether the Asset Register could be appended to the AMP. 

(5)       Andy Walker would forward comments made by the Committee to the Executive when the Q3 budget report was discussed. 

(6)       The Head of Highways and Transport would be asked to provide further detail on the car park budgets in advance of the next meeting to allow Members the opportunity to request more information if required.  The Head of Service would then be invited to attend the next meeting to discuss this in detail.