Agenda item

Report of the Interim Director of Resources

Presented by the Corporate Portfolio Holder

Councillor N J Rushton presented the report to members, drawing their attention to Section 2 of the report which set out the General Fund and Special Expenses budget proposals for 2016/17.  In particular he asked members to note that the provisional 2016/17 New Homes Bonus had been set at just under £2.8m, which was £350k higher than assumed in the Medium Term Financial Strategy, reflecting the excellent work that had been done in bringing empty homes back into use and ensuring that new homes qualified for the Bonus at the earliest opportunity.  He felt that with unknowns such as the Business Rates Retention Income and the New Homes Bonus Consultation Exercise, this was a prudent budget that held higher than historic levels of reserves.

 

Councillor N J Rushton highlighted that it was recommended to freeze the district’s Council Tax for the seventh year running, and North West Leicestershire was the only other local authority he was aware of, apart from Mansfield District Council, to have done so.  He added that this was something to be proud of as this represented a saving to our residents of £23.45 per annum on a Band D Council Tax bill.  He stated that he was also pleased to be able to continue to provide over £100,000 in localisation of Council Tax support grant to parishes.  He added that he would endeavour to maintain this support for as long as possible, however parish councils should be aware that there were particularly challenging times ahead.

 

Councillor N J Rushton made reference to Section 2.6 of the report which detailed the Projected Outturn for 2015/16 and explained the forecast under spend of £1.6 million. He advised that it was recommended to transfer this surplus to a special projects reserve, as both the end of year position and projected budget for 2016/17 relied heavily on the projected business rates income.  He added that it was therefore prudent to wait until the business rates were finalised in May prior to making any commitments to how the budgets may be allocated, and Cabinet would receive further reports in due course.

 

Councillor N J Rushton drew members’ attention to Section 3 of the report which set out the Housing Revenue Account proposals. Members were asked to note that the Government had changed its position regarding the rent decrease and this was explained in the addendum to the Cabinet report which had been circulated to members.  He advised that the balance on the Housing Revenue Account at 31 March 2016 was estimated at £5.3 million, which significantly exceeded the agreed minimum working balance of £1m.  He added that the HRA budget for 2016/17 would produce an estimated surplus of £2.5 million which would increase the HRA balance to just under £7.8 million, which would provide a healthy provision for the repayment of loans within the HRA Business Plan.  He congratulated the Housing department on doing an exceedingly good job in managing this.  With regard to rents, he advised that changing the core assumptions had led to a remodelling of the HRA business plan, with a particular focus on re-profiling or reducing the capital programme and the generation of additional income.  He explained that for service charges, an increase of 4.92% was proposed, and central heating charges would be maintained at existing levels. There would also be a small increase in garage rent levels of 0.8%, in line with the Retail Price Index.

 

Councillor N J Rushton highlighted Section 4 of the report which set out the proposed General Fund and Coalville Special Expenses Capital Programmes.  He stated that these programmes would allow for the continuation of the Disabled Facilities Grants Scheme and the Vehicle Replacement Programme, and in addition would see the development of new schemes that would enable improvement of facilities for residents and businesses, and continuing improvement of the efficiency and effectiveness of current services.  He advised that these schemes totalled £2.8 million for 2016/1 7 as set out in section 4.3 of the report.  He also brought to members’ attention the 2017/18 purchases at paragraph 4.3.12, for which approval was sought.

 

Councillor N J Rushton referred to the HRA capital programme set out at section 4.5 of the report, which outlined plans for the Maintaining Decency Programme and for increasing the number of Council owned homes through new build and acquisition.  He added that building new Council houses was something to be exceedingly proud of.

 

Councillor N J Rushton highlighted Section 5 of the report which outlined the various recommendations for setting the Council Tax.

 

Councillor N J Rushton moved the recommendations as set out in the report.  This was seconded by Councillor D J Stevenson who reserved his comments.

 

The Chairman referred to the amendment to the motion which had been circulated in the additional papers.  He invited Councillor F Fenning to put forward his amendment.

 

Councillor N J Rushton left the meeting during consideration of the amendment to the motion and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon.

 

Councillor F Fenning spoke to his amendment, highlighting the two measures for immediate implementation which would benefit families, residents and businesses, and uplift the spirit of our communities.  He referred to the first part of the amendment proposing free swimming for all under 16’s, which would assist in hitting the county Health and Wellbeing Board priorities, namely giving children the best start in life by tackling health inequalities.  He highlighted the second part of the amendment in respect of car parking which would benefit traders, visitors and local residents, and would provide valuable data to feed into any future review of parking and town centre life.  He advised that the amendments are proposed to be funded by reducing the transfer of forecast income over expenditure to the special projects reserve by an estimated £160,000.  He formally moved the amendment. 

 

This was seconded by Councillor J Legrys who reserved his comments.

 

Councillor A V Smith expressed amazement at the amendment.  She stated that the leisure offer across North West Leicestershire was currently being considered, therefore to go into detail at this time was totally inappropriate.  She added that members were aware that the car parking strategy was under review at present, and the first part of the report should be available at the end of March.  She urged members to vote against the amendment.

 

Councillor T J Pendleton pointed out that the Activ8 scheme rewarded those individuals who were willing to put the time in to build up credits and effectively provided school age children with free swimming.  He added that most schools were signed up to this scheme.  He stated that therefore he was not in favour of a blanket scheme such as this as it was unnecessary and he could not support the amendment.

 

Councillor T Eynon stated that whilst the administration was quite rightly anxious about an uncertain financial future, it was proposing to transfer £1.6 million into a special projects reserve.  She added that whilst the opposition accepted the need to hold substantial reserves, in order to comply with its express purpose, at least some of this special projects reserve needed to be spent on special projects, which should not only benefit taxpayers in the area but should be schemes that led to future growth and enhanced the wealth and the wellbeing of the community.  She commented that Leicestershire County Council had agreed budget cuts affecting the leisure coordinators which were currently funded by Public Health England.  She felt that rising levels of childhood obesity meant that district councils needed to find new ways to encourage inactive families to become active.  She acknowledged that free swimming was already available from this Council to families in receipt of means tested benefits, to those with disabilities, and to members of a corporate parenting family, and thanks to Leicester-Shire and Rutland Sport, children at schools across North West Leicestershire could sign up to the Activ8 scheme and claim weekly points during term time which could be spent either on one session of swimming or volleyball, badminton, football or trampolining.  She added that the extension of free swimming proposed in this amendment would work alongside the school based programme to raise expectations, encouraging children to consider swimming and ball games, effectively funding two leisure activities a week in term time for school aged children instead of one.  She commented that this would also encourage increased use of our leisure centres not just in term time but in the summer holidays also, drawing people into the leisure centre where they would contribute to income through secondary spending in the cafe, thereby not only benefitting children’s health but enhancing the sustainability of our leisure services. She concluded that this would encourage children to use leisure centres outside of the school term and promote a life-long commitment to health, as well as providing children with something to do during the long school holidays, which would help to prevent the boredom that leads to costly antisocial activities.  She hoped that all members saw the point of investing a relatively small proportion of the special projects reserve in the health of our children and the sustainability of our leisure centres rather than hiding taxpayers money under the mattress.

 

The Chairman reminded members to confine their comments to the subject matter of the amendment only at this point in the debate.

 

Councillor S Sheahan stated that he was surprised at the opposition to the proposal in respect of car parking, which was exactly the same scheme which had been brought in by East Staffordshire Borough Council and would cost approximately 10% of car parking income.  He commented that this would be doing something concrete to boost trade in town centres which was a high priority for the Leader.  He added that the proposal would provide benefits to parking enforcement elsewhere in the district as it would free up officers after 3.00pm.  He referred in particular to a problem with car parking on Chapel Street in Measham which he felt was an embarrassment to the Council due to its inability to deal with the problem within existing resources.  He concluded that the proposal would provide significant benefits and he could not understand why the administration would not take this forward.

 

Councillor S McKendrick stated that the aim of the proposal was continued investment in people and businesses in the district, providing an opportunity to encourage people into town centres and encouraging physical activity for young people.  She commented that swimming was an activity which provided so many benefits to people of all ages, as it was a social and physical activity, which led to improved health and wellbeing.  She added that obesity was an increasing health issue that impacted on young people’s lives in many ways, including limitations on physical abilities, increased risk of illness leading to time away from education, and continued obesity into adulthood, placing more demands upon health services which were already struggling to meet current demands.  She commented that the Council provided the Activ8 programme and leisure pass to a significant number of young people, presumably because the wider benefits were understood, and therefore she could not understand why the Council would not want to extend this opportunity to every young person under sixteen.  She added that the proposal complemented the health and wellbeing agenda and the wellbeing centred approach.  She stated that the government recognised the benefits of free car parking and was encouraging local authorities to provide this in town centres.  She added that it was necessary to increase footfall to support our local businesses and this was a real opportunity to test out the assumptions that free parking increased footfall.  She concluded that these were strong, cost effective proposals that invested in our people and town centres.

 

Councillor D Everitt stated the he could not understand why freezing Council Tax for seven years was positive as this had an associated cost.  He made references to a particular case relating to ongoing housing repairs.

 

The Chairman reminded Councillor D Everitt to confine his comments to the amendment only at this point in the debate.

 

Councillor D Everitt stated that he could imagine the advantage to people of having free parking from 3.00pm onwards which would remove the anxiety relating to getting a ticket.  He stated that Council staff were struggling as there was a massive turnover and he believed that this was because they were not being properly financed.

 

The Chairman called for order at this point in the debate and invited Councillor D Everitt to relay any unrelated issues to the Portfolio Holder.

 

Councillor M Specht stated that money was being spent on wellbeing at the leisure centres.  He added that he could not see how free swimming would prevent antisocial behaviour and as such, he would be voting against the amendment.

 

Councillor J Geary stated that he was bitterly disappointed when Councillor A V Smith advised members to vote against the amendment before they had had an opportunity to debate it.  He added that he spent a lot of time in Coalville town centre talking to business people, and was very conscious of the health of the town centre and its businesses.  He sought to comment on the Leader’s Announcement at Annual Council in May 2015.

 

Councillor D J Stevenson sought to raise a point of order under procedure rule 14.4 as Councillor J Geary’s comments were not related to the amendment under discussion.  The Chairman ruled that the point was well taken.

 

Councillor J Geary stated that the Coalville Town Team had requested a review of car parking over the last few years.  He commented that this proposal would provide an opportunity to have two hours free car parking at the end of every day and would also enable us to assess the impact that had on the footfall in Coalville.  He added that this would also fall in line with neighbouring towns such as Burton on Trent.  He concluded that the fact that we could not see our way to do that would disappoint traders in Coalville, and was a classic example of saying one thing and doing another.

 

Councillor R Blunt thanked the Labour Group for attempting to influence the budget process.  He commented that a good opposition should produce a proper budget. He added that timing was really important and a review was currently being conducted of what was offered in our leisure centres.  He commented that there were more people going to our leisure centres than ever before.  He added that nothing was ever free, and was either paid for by the Council Tax payer or by the customer.  He stated that car parking had been under discussion for as long as he had been a Councillor.  He advised that a consultant had been commissioned to see what worked.  He added that in the last 7 seven years, car parking charges had not been increased by a single penny.  He stated that the special projects reserve was for a one off project, and what was proposed would be an ongoing expense.  He added that the timing was wrong.  He stated that he would bring the recommendations from the review to Scrutiny.   

 

Councillor J Legrys expressed disappointment that Councillor R Blunt had raised points not related to the amendment.  He stated that the amendment did not propose raising Council Tax, but rather proposed utilising money that was being filtered away.  He added that the proposals offered an opportunity to allow people to see and receive a return for their Council Tax, and would give residents who live in the town centres an opportunity to utilise the car parks for overnight parking.  He concluded that the amendment was cost effective and provided staff with an opportunity to access real time data rather than paying for more consultants to tell people what they wanted.

 

The Chairman then put the motion to the vote.

 

A recorded vote being required in accordance with the Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014, the voting was as follows:

 

For the motion:

Councillors R Adams, N Clarke, D Everitt, T Eynon, F Fenning, J Geary, R Johnson, J Legrys, S McKendrick, S Sheahan (10).

 

Against the motion:

Councillors G A Allman, R D Bayliss, R Blunt, R Boam, R Canny, J Clarke, J Cotterill, J G Coxon, S Gillard, T Gillard, L Goacher, D Harrison, G Hoult, J Hoult, G Jones, K Merrie, T J Pendleton, P Purver, V Richichi, A C Saffell, A V Smith, N Smith, M Specht, D J Stevenson and M B Wyatt (25).

 

Abstentions:

Councillor J Bridges (1).

 

Therefore the motion was declared LOST.

 

Councillor N J Rushton returned to the meeting.

 

The Chairman then directed members to the debate on the substantive motion, as set out in the report.

 

Councillor R Johnson sought clarification on the earmarked reserves set out at paragraph 2.5.9 of the report, in particular the £10.5 million deficit and the intended use of the £10.5 million.

 

Councillor J Legrys thanked officers for their advice and help and congratulated them on putting the budget together.  He expressed disappointment in the budget and commented that this was a good budget for maintaining an institution, however he questioned what it was actually achieving for the community and the people who paid Council Tax.

 

Councillor A C Saffell stated that he had always been very worried about the fact that the New Homes Bonus was utilised within the General Fund as he felt it was not safe money.  He added that this year, the New Homes Bonus made up approximately one quarter of the budget.  He commented that a 2% Council Tax increase in the last seven years this would have raised approximately the same amount of money.  He made reference to the lack of provision of the New Homes Bonus in Castle Donington.  He commented that Castle Donington Parish Council had increased its Council Tax by 50% to compensate for this and all the members had been elected unopposed because the local community was in agreement with the intended use of the money.

 

Councillor D Harrison stated that this was a superb budget and was well presented.  He added that it was necessary to be prudent and look to the future.  He commented that this was a good Council with good officers.  He highly commended the budget to members.

 

Councillor K Merrie agreed that this was a good budget and reiterated the need to hold reserves.

 

Councillor R Blunt felt that the public would like to see more consensus.  He stated that what the administration had done for the people of North West Leicestershire was that they had not raised Council Tax since 2007.

 

Councillor N Smith commented that the previous Labour administration had stood back and watched Coalville die.

 

Councillor D Everitt stated that Coalville was hit by decline and he felt Coalville did very well in retrospect.  He made comments relating to central government and the duty of the opposition.

 

Councillor D Harrison sought to make a point of correction about the deregulation of banks.

 

The Chairman called for order at this point in the meeting.

 

Councillor R D Bayliss stated that he was quite proud of the housing element of the budget and expressed pride in the officers.  He made reference to the directive from central government to reduce rents 1%, which had a cumulative impact upon the 30 year business plan.  He stated that the decent homes standard would be maintained and a new build programme had been established, which would be financed from the Council’s own resources.  He expressed every confidence in the budget as a whole, he commended it to members and hoped it would find universal support.

 

Councillor D J Stevenson thanked officers as he felt the budget proposals were the easiest to understand in all his time on the Council.  He suggested that the opposition should produce an alternative budget.

 

Councillor N J Rushton exercised his right of reply and stated that it had been the policy of this authority that the New Homes Bonus was spent for the benefit of the whole district, not just Castle Donington, however he recognised the increase in housing in the area.  He added that the New Homes Bonus would reduce over the next few years, and money was being put aside to compensate for this dip in funding.  He explained that a full list of earmarked reserves was available and the £1.7 million deficit was the amount which had been spent from earmarked reserves in the previous year.  He added that another prudent use of reserves was funding capital projects. 

 

Councillor N J Rushton made a comment relating to the leadership of the Labour Group. 

 

Councillor J Legrys made it clear that he regarded his comments as an insult. 

 

The Chairman reminded Councillor N J Rushton to confine his comments to the motion currently under discussion.

 

Councillor N J Rushton outlined the function of the Council and stated that he was proud of what was being achieved in terms of economic development, and North West Leicestershire had the lowest rate of unemployment in the East Midlands. 

 

The Chairman then put the motion to the vote.

 

A recorded vote being required in accordance with the Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014, the voting was as follows:

 

For the motion:

Councillors G A Allman, R D Bayliss, R Blunt, J Bridges, R Boam, J Clarke, J Cotterill, J G Coxon, S Gillard, T Gillard, L Goacher, D Harrison, G Hoult, J Hoult, G Jones, K Merrie, T J Pendleton, P Purver, V Richichi, N J Rushton, A V Smith, N Smith, M Specht and D J Stevenson (24).

 

Against the motion:

Councillor M B Wyatt (1).

 

Abstentions:

Councillor R Adams. R Canny, N Clarke, D Everitt, T Eynon, F Fenning, J Geary, R Johnson, J Legrys, S McKendrick, A C Saffell, S Sheahan (12).

 

The motion was declared CARRIED.

 

RESOLVED THAT:

 

a)     The deputy Section 151 Officer’s comments on the robustness of the estimates and adequacy of reserves be noted.

 

b)     The transfer of any surplus income over expenditure be approved in 2016/17 to the General Fund balance at 31 March 2017 for further consideration after completion of the 2015/16 accounts.

 

c)     The forecasted surplus income over expenditure in 2015/16 be transferred to the special projects reserve.

 

d)     The General Fund and Special Expenses budgets for 2016/17 be approved.

 

e)     The Special Expenses precepts for 2016/17 be approved.

 

f)       The Housing Revenue Account rent decrease by 1% (average decrease £0.83 per week) for 2016/17 be approved (excluding sheltered and supported housing which are dealt with in recommendation 12).

 

g)     The increase of 0.8% (average increase £0.05 per week) in the rent of garages for 2016/17 be approved.

 

h)     The average increase in the HRA service charges of 4.92% (£0.16 per week) for 2016/17 be approved.

 

i)       The ground rent increase of 0.8% (£0.24 per week) at Appleby Magna caravan site be approved.

 

j)       The increases in lifeline charges of 0.8% (£0.34 per quarter) be approved.

 

k)     Central heating charges for 2016/17 remain at the same level as for 2015/16.

 

l)       The rent increase of 0.9% (average £0.62 per week) for sheltered and supported housing be approved.

 

m)   The Housing Revenue Account budgets for 2016/17 be approved.

 

n)     The proposed Coalville Special Expenses and HRA Capital Programmes for 2016/17 and planned financing be approved.

 

o)     Capital expenditure in 2016/17 be approved and capital expenditure in 2017/18 for the vehicle replacement programme only.

 

p)     The remainder of the Capital Programmes 2017/18 to 2019/20 be approved as indicative only at this stage.

 

q)     The district Council Tax for 2016/17 be frozen.

 

r)      The following amounts be approved for the year 2016/17 in accordance with Section 31b of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as amended:

 

(1)      30,319 being the amount calculated by the Council, in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) (England) Regulations 2012, as its Council Tax base for the year.

 

(2)   The amounts specified in Table 1 of this report being the amounts calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, as the amounts of its Council Tax Base for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more special items relate.

 

s)     The following amounts be now calculated by the Council for the year 2016/17 in accordance with Sections 31a and 31b of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as amended:

 

(1)      District / parish gross expenditure

£60,917,099being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31a (2) of the Act.

 

(2)    Income

               £53,959,242 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council          estimates for the items set out in Section 31a (3) of the Act.

 

(3)    District / parish net expenditure

               £6,957,857 being the amount by which the aggregate at 19(1) above        exceeds the          aggregate at 19(2) above, calculated by the Council in       accordance with Section 31a (4) of the Act as its Council Tax requirement       for        the       year.   

 

(4)    Basic amount of tax (including average parish precepts)

               £229.49 being the amount at 19(3) above, divided by the amount stated   as        the Council Tax Base in parts of the Council’s area, calculated by the    Council in accordance with Section 31 b of the Act as the basic amount of   its Council Tax for the year.

 

(5)    Parish precepts/special expenses

               £ 2,149,870 being the aggregate amount of all special items referred to in                Section 35(1) of the Act.

 

(6)    Basic amount of tax (basic Council Tax – district)

 £158.58 being the amount at 19(4) above less the result given by dividing the amount at 19(5) above by the amount as stated as the Council Tax Base for the whole of the Council area, calculated by the Council in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its Council Tax for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no special item relates.

 

(7)    Basic amount of tax (parished areas)

               The amounts listed in column 5 of Table 2 to this report, being the             amounts given by adding to the amount at 19(6) above, the amounts of          the       special item or items relating to dwellings in those parts of the Council’s       area mentioned, divided in each case by the amount stated as the       Council Tax base in parts of the Council area, calculated by the         Council in        accordance with Section 34(3) of the Act as the basic amounts of its Council             Tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which one or more     special items relate.

 

(8)    District /parish Council Tax rates

               The amounts set out  in Table 3 to this report being the amounts given by                multiplying the amounts at 19(6) and 19(7) above by the number which, in            the proportion set  out in Section 5(1) of the Act, is applicable to dwellings         listed in a particular valuation band divided by the          number which in that   proportion is    applicable to dwellings listed in valuation band d, calculated      by the Council in accordance with Section 36(1) of the Act as the amounts         to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwelling         listed in different valuation bands.

 

t)       Major precepting authorities

                  That it be noted that the amounts set out in Table 4 to this report are the amounts notified by Leicestershire County Council, Leicestershire Police and Crime Commissioner and the Combined Fire Authority in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 as their precepts for 2016/17 for each of the categories of dwellings listed.

 

u)    Council Tax rates – all bands

      That, having calculated the aggregate in each case of the amounts at19(8) (Table 3) and 20 (Table 4) above, the Council in accordance with Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 hereby sets the amounts of Council Tax for the Council’s area for the year 2016/17 for each of the categories of dwellings as shown in Table 5. 

 

v)     Referendums relating to Council Tax increases

      That it be noted that the relevant basic amount of Council Tax for 2016/17 is not excessive.