Agenda item

(Director of Resources) to consider the attached report.

The Assistant Director Accountancy, P Maddock, introduced the report on comparison between the original estimates for the period ended 10 June and the actual expenditure or income as applicable.

The meeting noted that:

·         The salaries schedule showed an underspend of £144,000 or 2.5%. At the first quarter last year the underspend was 3.6%;

·         Resources was showing the largest underspend of £92,000, this relates mainly to Revenues and Housing Benefits;

·         Communities showed an underspend of £37,000 relating to Communities Policy as the Assistant Director – Private Sector Housing post became vacant during the period, and Housing Management;

·         The investment interest was broadly on target with the budget. Interest rates were now only a little over 0.1% and money was primarily being held short term because of the significant capital commitments coming up;

·         Development Control income at Month 3 was down on expectations;

·         Fees and charges were £49,000 lower than the budget to date and pre-application charges were £7,000 higher than expected;

·         Building Control income was £33,000 higher than the budgeted figure at the end of the first quarter. The ring-fenced account had assumed a deficit of £129,000 for this year due to the amount of scanning work required, however based on income levels to date this looked likely to be better than expected;

·         Income from MOT’s carried out by Fleet Operations was in line with expectations;

·         Car Parking income appears broadly on target with expectations at month 3;

·         Local Land Charge income was £3,000 above expectations;

·         Expenditure and income relating to Bed and Breakfast placements was on the increase;

·         Growth of £28,000 was allowed for in 2016/17 with a further £12,000 in 2017/18. The 2016/17 actual was nearer the 2017/18 original position than the revised 2016/17 and there were no signs of expenditure levels abating. Some new initiatives were being pursued in an effort to stem the increase and additional government funding in the form of Flexible Homeless Grant was being used to fund programmes such as the Zinc Arts Scheme in Ongar;

·         The waste and leisure management contracts showed some underspend due to timing. The latter particularly, as payments didn’t commence until July;

·         The Housing Repairs Fund showed an underspend of £62,000. There were underspends showing on both Planned Maintenance and Responsive work;

·         Income from Building Control and probably Car Parking look likely to exceed the budget; and

·         The Shopping park was now open for business with only one or two units still to be let.

Councillor Patel wanted to know why the Chief Executive’s budget had doubled. He was told that was because more staff had moved into his purview.

Councillor Patel also wondered why the disabled facilities grant was underspent. He was told that this went in peaks and troughs over the year; there was no specific reason for this.

Mr Maddock noted that this was the sixth year of operation for the Business Rates Retention Scheme whereby a proportion of rates collected were retained by the Council. There were proposals that all Business Rates be retained within the local government sector though this actually happening was unlikely before the year 2020/21.

Cash collection was important as the Council was required to make payments to the Government and other authorities based on their share of the rating list. These payments were fixed and have to be made even if no money was collected.

Councillor Bassett asked if the appeals lodged against the business rates were near to, or had been completed. Mr Maddock said that none had, they were dragging on for a long time. There were a few hundred on that list now. Councillor Bedford wondered if we could speed up the appeals process but was told that we had no control over this; however, they were chased up. Councillor Mohindra noted that we did have a contingency fund of about £2million for this.

Councillor Patel said that he would like the business rate appeals to go on the work programme and have a report come back to the committee. He would like to know how many came back in our favour and how many we lost. Councillor Bedford asked if it was worth investing in putting a dedicated officer in place to speed up this process, under the invest to save scheme. This could be put up the relevant Portfolio Holder or Cabinet.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the Committee noted the revenue and capital financial monitoring report for the first quarter of 2017/18; and

2)    That a report on Business Rate appeals be brought to a future meeting.