Agenda and minutes

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any personal, disclosable pecuniary or other registrable interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

The Interim Executive Director (Resources) and Monitoring Officer advised that all Members had completed an application for a Grant of a Dispensation in relation to any beneficial interest in land within the Authority’s area. The dispensation was granted to allow all Members to speak and vote on the budget items.

A number of personal interests had been declared in advance of the meeting in relation to the agenda items, they had been published on the website and were on display on the door of the Council Chamber. These interests, as well as those declared during the meeting, were as follows:

Members of the Executive to answer questions submitted by members of the public in accordance with the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Council's Constitution.

Details of the public and Member question and answer sessions are available from the following link: Q&As.

Purpose: The purpose of the Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) is to determine financial planning assumptions for future years and align these with the Council Strategy to ensure that the strategy will be delivered. The MTFS highlights the overarching key issues facing the Council’s finances and references the many different scenarios and wider uncertainties concerning the Council’s future revenue streams.

Council considered a report (Agenda Item 4) concerning the Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2025/26 to 2028/29.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Iain Cottingham and seconded by Councillor Jeff Brooks:

“That Council approves the Medium-Term Financial Strategy as set out as Append A to the report.”

Councillor Cottingham introduced the report and highlighted that it set out the Council’s financial plan for next four years and was aligned to the delivery of Council’s strategy. He indicated that it had been a challenge to forecast financial performance, especially during the current period risk and uncertainty. In particular, Councillor Cottingham highlighted that adult social care, children’s services, home to school transport, and homelessness support were all areas where the Council had seen a substantial increase in cost pressures. These increasing costs effected many other authorities around the country who were also struggling to set balanced budgets. It was publicly known that the Council’s finances had been strained for a number of years as a result of the increased costs in those areas and it was indicated to Council that the costs of adult social care, children’s services, and home to school transport had risen by £20.7m (25.4 per cent) over the last two financial years.

Despite the Council working to reduce costs since taking office in 2023, such as reducing agency spend by £4m per annum, the Council had requested Exception Financial Support (EFS) from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG). These funds, amounting to £16m, would be used to strengthen the Council’s reserves in 2024/25 (by £13m), and thereby increase its resiliency, and also support the 2025/26 revenue budget (by £3m). This Council was notified that the request for EFS had been granted, and the Service Director for Finance, Property & Procurement and Section 151 Officer would be working with the MHCLG to determine the optimum method of accessing these funds and understanding the conditions applied to the funds.

Members discussed the EFS, and although satisfied that it had been secured, noted that the Council would be effectively bankrupt if it was not granted or was withdrawn. Although the cost pressures the Council was experiencing were not unique to West Berkshire, some Members wanted the Council to do more to attempt to address these pressures, rather than relying on intervention from Central Government. In response to these points, it was clarified that the Council would not be bankrupt if it did not receive EFS, although it would be forced to make an addition £5m worth of cuts, significantly harming Council services across the district.

Some Members noted that the £13m of EFS that would be used to bolster the Council’s reserves would take the Council above the minimum recommended level set by the Section 151 Officer of £9.3m. As there was no detail about what the reserves over that minimum level would be used for, it was proposed that they would be used to support the revenue budget.

The repayments on the EFS were raised as an area of concern. Assuming  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Purpose: The report seeks to consolidate the investments and borrowing strategy for the year ahead by detailing how and where the Council will invest and borrow in the forthcoming year, within a particular framework. This strategy is monitored throughout the year, with a mid-year report going to the Governance Committee as well as an annual report being presented to Members.

Council considered a report (Agenda Item 5) concerning the Investment and Borrowing Strategy Financial Year 2025/26.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Iain Cottingham and seconded by Councillor Jeff Brooks:

“That Council approves and adopts the proposed Investment and Borrowing Strategy for 2025/26”

Councillor Cottingham introduced the report and highlighted that it was critical for the Council to manage liquidity risk prudently and so the report set out where the Council would borrow and invest its money. He confirmed to Council that there was a rigorous process prosed to assess risk and comply with the appropriate financial indicators. The borrowing needed for the High Needs Block was raised as a concern, with the increasing pressures around funding for adult social care potentially exceeding the Council's liability benchmark in 2027. In addition, the report set a target that the Council’s weighted average for borrowing should be below 4 per cent interest. Councillor Cottingham also indicated that the capital receipts from divestments would be used to fund the capital programme and that, through EFS, the Council would launch a municipal bond for green initiatives. Overall, he was satisfied that the report provided the Council a robust and prudent investment and borrowing platform.

Members discussed the Council’s commercial property portfolio with some members celebrating its past successes. Established in 2018 by the previous Administration, the property portfolio took advantage of cheap interest rates, generated around a £1m in rent each year, and was done with the support of the then opposition party. Given the deadlines for disposal set by the current administration, several Members believed that the approach proposed was not prudent. However, Members of the Administration indicated that they would have preferred the properties to be purchased inside the district and that the disposal approach suggested was appropriate as the capital receipts would go to support the budget. In addition, they assumed that when the properties were purchased, a property sinking fund would be put in place, but that this had not be done. For this reason, keeping the properties risked generating greater maintenance costs for the Council and disposal would ensure that the EFS could be paid back. They also emphasised that the only property that had been sold by the Administration did not make a loss. 

Some Members expressed concern about the spending for several capital projects that they considered to be non-urgent, such as with the solar farm project. They believed that these projects could be deferred, and the Council could save with not having to pay the borrowing costs. However, Members noted that the proposed solar farm would be paid back over ten years and also contribute to the Council’s net zero target as well as delivering a significant number of carbon credits.

Overall, as Council was satisfied with the proposals outlined, they agreed to approve the Investment and Borrowing Strategy for the financial year 2025/26.

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.

Purpose: To outline the Capital Strategy period and the supporting funding framework, providing a high-level overview of how capital expenditure, capital financing and treasury management activity contribute to the provision of local public services along with an overview of how associated risk is managed and the implications for future financial sustainability.

Council considered a report (Agenda Item 6) concerning the Capital Strategy for the Financial Years 2025/26 to 2028/29.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Iain Cottingham and seconded by Councillor Jeff Brooks:

“That Council approves the Capital Strategy and supporting capital programme for financial year 2025/26 as set out as Appendix A to the report.”

Councillor Cottingham introduced the report and highlighted that the report provided an overview of the Councils plans for investments in infrastructure and public services in West Berkshire. He also clarified the distinction between revenue and capital, and that the Council could borrow to support capital investments but could not borrow to support day to day expenses (the revenue budget).

It was emphasised that each capital project, such as Special Education Needs and Disabilities infrastructure, supporting nutrient neutrality, Brookfields expansion, and highways and infrastructure improvements, would be aligned with the Councils priorities. This included £3.13m for ‘services we are proud of’, £12.08m for ‘a fairer West Berkshire with opportunities for all’, £25.61m for ‘tackling climate change and ecological emergency’, £23.4m for ‘a prosperous and resilient West Berkshire’, and £0.36 for ‘thriving communities with a strong local voice’.

Overall, the Council would seek to use capital receipts flexibly whilst continuing to derisk from commercial property.

AMENDMENT: In the name of the Minority Group, proposed by Councillor Adrian Abbs and Seconded by Councillor Clive Taylor:

“Original Text:

Planned Capital Programme: Financial Year 2025/26.

Proposed amendment:

1.       Social care management system replacement: remove from the programme. Saving: £959,694.

2.       Procurement and implementation of new financial management system: remove from the programme. Saving: £750,000.

3.       West Berkshire Museum damp conditions improvement. Reduce by 50% to £191,625. Saving: £191,625.

4.       Microsoft Co-pilot feasibility study. Reduce by 50% to £27,500. Saving: £27,500.

Total reduction in capital programme as per the above: £1,928,819. We propose that the resultant savings in borrowing be used to support the 2025/26 revenue budget.”

Councillor Abbs introduced the proposed amendment and highlighted that, with devolution and local government reorganisation approaching, the Council should wait to see what structure it would be taking, and with what new partners, before making significant investments in new systems. In addition, with the current constraints on Council staffing, delaying the procurement of new systems would free up Officer time. He also believed that Central Government would assist with the reorganisation costs as it was a policy driven by the Government. A number of other Members also agreed that the adoption of new systems should be delayed until the outcome of local government reorganisation was known, and that the Council should seek to negotiate extensions to their existing licenses. If removed from the capital programme, the savings from the not adopting these systems amounted to almost £2m.

On the Microsoft Co-pilot feasibility study, it was questioned why this was necessary. The Council could either do a full feasibility study with all of the potential other AI options or move ahead with adopting Co-pilot. Finally, on the museum damp proofing, Councillor Abbs suggested that a significant amount  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Purpose: The Council must set a balanced budget for the 2025/26 year by 11 March 2025. The budget acts as an indicator that the Council has set aside sufficient financial resources to achieve its objectives and to ensure that Council Tax bills can be issued to residents across the district prior to the start of the new financial year. This report details the budget proposals for the year ahead that form the basis of the 2025/26 revenue budget and detail the respective Council Tax proposals and resolutions.

Council considered a report (Agenda Item 7) concerning the Revenue Budget for 2025/26.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Iain Cottingham and seconded by Councillor Jeff Brooks:

“1.      That Council approves the 2025/26 Council Tax requirement of £131.64 million, requiring a Council Tax increase of 2.99% with a 2% Council Tax precept ring-fenced for Adult Social Care.

2.       That the fees and charges are approved as set out in Appendix G and that the appropriate statutory written notices be placed where required.

3.       That it be noted that the following amounts for the year 2025/26, in accordance with regulations made under Section 31B of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, as amended (by the Localism Act 2011), are as follows: -

(a)      68,511.33 being the amount calculated by the Council, (Item T) in accordance with regulation 31B of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax base) Regulations 1992 (as amended by the Localism Act 2011), as its Council Tax base for the year (the number of properties paying Council Tax)

(b)      Part of the Council’s area as per Appendix J being the amounts calculated by the Council, in accordance with regulation 6 of the Regulations, as the amounts of its Council Tax base for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which a Parish precept relates

4.       Calculate that the Council Tax requirement for the Council’s own purposes for 2025/26 (excluding Parish precepts) is £131,638,354.

5.       That the following amounts be now calculated by the Council for the year 2025/26 in accordance with Sections 31A to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, amended by the Localism Act: -

(a)      £447,851,588 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A(2), (a) to (f) of the Act taking into account all precepts issued to it by Parish councils

(b)      £309,920,765 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A(3), (a) to (d) of the Act

(c)      £137,930,823 being the amount by which the aggregate at 5(a) above, exceeds the aggregate at 5(b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with the Section 31A(4) of the Act, as its Council Tax requirement for the year (Item R specified in the Act)

(d)      £2,013.25 being the amount at 5(c) above (Item R), all divided by 3(a) above (Item T specified in the Act), calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31B of the Act, as the ‘basic amount of its Council Tax for the year (including Parish precepts)’

(e)      £6,292,469 being the aggregate amount of all special items (Parish precepts) referred to in Section 34(1) of the Act (as per Appendix J)

(f)       £1,921.41 being the amount at 5(d) above less the result given by dividing the amount at 5(e) above by the amount at 5(a) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.