Agenda and minutes

The Chairman reminded everyone present that the meeting would be broadcast live to the Internet, and that the Council had adopted a protocol for the webcasting of its meetings.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive) To declare interests in any item on this agenda.

Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillors S Stravrou, J Knapman, J Philip, K Angold-Stephens, A Lion and D Stallan declared a personal interest in item 9 of the agenda, in so far as it relates to the Local Council Tax Support payable to Parish Councils as they are Parish Councillors. They understood that there are no binding decisions being made by the Committee at the meeting and therefore would advise that when the decisions were due on this later in the budget cycle, they would seek a dispensation from the Standards Committee to participate.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Cabinet Committee.

            RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 14 November 2013 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

Assistant Director (Accountancy) To consider the attached report (FPM-019-2013/14).

The Assistant Director (Accountancy) presented a report regarding the Cross Charging sub-group findings on the recharge of support services.

At the Finance Cabinet Committee on 21 January 2013, questions were raised by members about the reasons for recharging costs and a desire to understand the process.

The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) produce a document on an annual basis called the Service Reporting Code of Practice (SeRCOP), which gives guidance on how costs should be reported in an effort to get some degree of consistency across Local Authorities. The Main General Fund headings applicable to the Council were Central Services, Cultural Related Services, Environmental and Regulatory Services, Highways and Transport Services, Housing Services and Planning Services. The Housing Revenue Account (HRA) had to be accounted for separately by law. These were the headings that appear in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement within the Statutory Statement of Accounts. SeRCOP also required a subjective analysis of each Service budget heading. A subjective heading refers to the type of expenditure, for example Salaries, Electricity, Car Allowances, Stationery, Contracted Services and Support Services to name but a few. There was also a requirement to report the ‘total cost of a service’ and this was defined as including all expenditure attributable to the service/activity. Both direct costs and support costs must be included and this was the reason for the recharge process that was carried out. The Council, because it was a Democratic organisation, had additional costs and this was referred to as the Corporate and Democratic Core which was a sub heading within Central Services. This was initially a General Fund cost but other accounts such as the HRA or Pension Fund, if applicable, were required to contribute toward their share of the cost. This needed to be based on a reasonable estimate of the time spent on HRA matters by those involved in the democratic process.

The Sub Group had met and examined some of the Support Service budget sheets which show the individual budgets at subjective level. All Revenue budgets were constructed in this manner so that each Service budget was made up of a number of smaller subjective budgets. The budget was monitored at the subjective level as well as the Service total level and all Support Services were fully allocated to the services that they supported. The process was a financial accounting process intended to calculate the total cost of each service, although the total cost as defined by the code may or may not be relevant for decision making purposes but would depend on the type of decision to be made.

Resolved:

(1)        That the Cross Charging Sub Group report be noted.

Reasons for Decision:

To note the work carried out.

Other Options Considered and Rejected:

No other options available.

(Directorate of Finance & ICT) To consider the attached report (FPM-020-2012/13).

The Assistant Director (ICT) presented a report regarding the ICT facilities for Councillors.

The Assistant Director (ICT) reported that following a request from the Finance and  Performance Management Scrutiny Panel on 12 March 2013, a Members workshop was held to ascertain the general ICT facilities needed for Members and development of the new EFDC website. Following this, Members were requested to complete an electronic questionnaire which received 16 replies. From the responses received, Members felt the Virtual Private Network (VPN) tokens required improvement and the majority of respondents only use the VPN to view agendas but would like to access restricted documents. It was therefore felt that the Mod.gov application would offer a better solution than VPN access. Regarding the provision of a Council email address, it had been felt that a capital cost of £25,600 and ongoing maintenance costs of £5,480 would need to be added to the ICT maintenance budget as a growth item for all members and this would be difficult to justify, particularly in the current financial climate.

Members queried the costs associated with the email addresses and that if the Good application was made available to Councillors, they would not necessarily need Microsoft accounts. The promotion of the Mod.gov app and a pilot scheme for members using their own mobile devices would give a better understanding of how these ICT facilities could work for all members. Also with a pilot scheme, any spare  Good accounts could be used resulting in no further costs.

(Directorate of Finance & ICT) To consider the attached report (FPM-021-2012/13).

The Assistant Director (Accountancy) presented the draft General Fund and Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Budgets for the financial year 2014/15.The budgets were presented on a directorate by directorate basis in line with the new directorate structure coming into force on 1 April 2014. In September 2013 it had been identified that a saving target for 2014/15, of £0.7 million had been set, which had been achieved through £354,000 savings from the Directorate restructure and additional income from the purchase of the lease of 2-18 Torrington Drive, which should bring in an additional income of £224,000 and a number of more minor items. The Directorate budgets were presented to the Cabinet Committee (and Scrutiny Panel) to consider and make recommendations prior to the budget being formerly set during February 2014.

Chief Executive

The Director of Finance and ICT reported that the directorate restructure had resulted in the chief executives budget now only consisting of charges defined as corporate activities by the CIPFA accounting code of practice and service reporting code of practice. The original estimate for 2013/14 CSB had been an expenditure of £1.048 million, with a probably outturn of 0.994million. The current draft estimate for 2014/15 was 0.956million, which followed a more detailed analysis of activity of Democratic Services and the on costs being allocated into the Governance Directorate.

The Director of Finance and ICT advised that the CSB budget showed planned savings of £22,000 in relation to salary savings from the directorate restructure. The District Development Fund (DDF) budget included £61,000 for Local Land & Property Gazetteer (LLPG) works, including the remainder of the £100,000 for LLPG funds previously allocated and a £150,000 for the transformation programme.

Councillor Knapman enquired whether the transformation programme would translate into savings. The Director of Finance and ICT advised that the funding would include ICT usages, head to desk ratio, the one-stop shop idea and a amalgamation of the reception areas and that the Chief Executive would produce business cases, prior to any spending.

Communities Directorate

The Director of Housing reported that the total original estimate for 2013/14 had been expenditure of £3.857 million, with a probable outturn of £3.458million. The current draft estimate for 2014/15 was £3.525million, which represented a year on year decrease of £332,000.

The Director of Housing advised that the main CSB change between periods was the slippage of commissioning the Town Mead All Weather Pitch. Other areas highlighted were as follows;

·         The way Public Sector Housing Grants were accounted for had altered.

·         Officers in the Housing Options Team had spent more time on homelessness issues in the current year, leading to an increased allocation of staffing costs.

·         Slippage in Voluntary Sector Support items within the Welfare Transport Scheme had seen £16,000 carried forward to 2014/15 and a fall in income on the museum budget due to it’s closure for refurbishments meant that net expenditure was expected to  increase by £19,000.

·         Within Sports Development and Other Miscellaneous Activities there was an increase  due to the new Safeguarding team being set  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

(Directorate of Finance & ICT) To consider the attached report (FPM-022-2012/13).

The Director of Finance and ICT presented a report regarding the Council’s Corporate Risk Register.

The Corporate Risk Register had been considered by both the Risk Management Group on 3 December and the Corporate Governance Group on 18 December 2013. These reviews identified amendments to the Corporate Risk Register and an additional risk for inclusion. These were as follows;

(a)  Risk 1 - Local Plan

The risk and supporting Action Plan had been redefined to promote a more comprehensive overview, and the risk score remained A1 Very high Likelihood/Major Impact.

(b)  Risk 6 – Information/Data

Work had been carried out to improve awareness of data protection requirements, therefore the risk score would be changed from C1 Medium Likelihood/Major Impact to C2 Medium Likelihood/Moderate Impact.

(c)  New Risk – Risk 9 Safeguarding

The Risk Management Group and the Corporate Governance Group considered the Safeguarding risk, which highlighted a number of areas where the Council must achieve a more widespread awareness of the responsibilities for safeguarding children and vulnerable adults, which had been scored at B2 high Likelihood/Moderate Impact.

Members were asked to consider the updated Corporate Risk Register and whether the risks listed were scored appropriately and the additional risk be included.

Recommended:

(1)          That Risk 1, Local Plan, be redefined to promote a more comprehensive overview;

(2)          That the rating for Risk 6, Information/Data be reduced to a score of C2 (Medium Likelihood/Moderate Impact);

(3)          That a new risk, Risk 9, Safeguarding be included in the Risk Register; and

(4)          That, incorporating the above agreed changes, the amended Corporate Risk Register be approved.

Reason for Decision:

It is essential that the Corporate Risk Register is regularly reviewed and kept up to date.

Other Options Considered and Rejected:

Members may suggest new risks for inclusion or changes to the scoring of existing risks.

(Directorate of Finance & ICT) To consider the attached report (FPM-023-2012/13).

The Director of Finance and ICT presented a report on the allocation of Local Council Tax Support Grants and reductions in funding.

Last year the Council had decided to top up the grant relating to local councils of £312,812 by an additional £7,460 in order to leave local councils no worse off following the introduction of Local Council Tax Support.

From the initial grant figures provided in late July, it had been clear that the amount of grant relating to local councils would no longer be separately identified and that the overall grant received would be substantially reduced. The Committee decided on 19 September 2013 that the grant available to local councils would be reduced by the same percentage as the Council’s overall grant had been reduced. It had been anticipated that the grant paid to each body in 2013/14 would be reduced by 13.6% for 2014/15. At the Local Councils Liaison meeting it had been suggested that, for the allocation to be as fair as possible, the amount of grant should reflect the loss of income to each body. The tax base had been set and the likely reduction in overall grant had been confirmed as 12.5%, which by applying the reduction to the 2013/14 grant gives an amount to be allocated amongst local councils of £280,236 for 2014/15.

Recommended:

(1)        That the Local Council Tax Support Grant available to Town and Parish Councils be reduced inline with the reduction in their Council Tax income as set out in appendix 1, be recommended to the Cabinet for approval.

Reasons for Proposed Decisions:

To agree the basis for allocating LCTS Grant and the amounts due to each Town and Parish Council.

Other Options for Action:

Members could decide to allocate the grant by reducing the amount payable to each local council by 12.5%. Alternatively, Members could decide to allocate more than the proposed amount, although this would require additional savings elsewhere in the budget to fund the local councils.

Resolved:

That, in accordance with Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, together with paragraphs (6) and (24) of the Council Procedure Rules, the Chairman had permitted the following item of urgent business to be considered following the publication of the agenda:

(a)  Council Budget 2014/15.

(Directorate of Finance & ICT) To consider the attached report (FPM-024-2013/14).

The Director of Finance and ICT presented a report detailing the proposed Council Budget for 2014/15, which would enable the Council’s policy on the level of reserves to be maintained throughout the period of the Medium Term Financial Strategy. The budget was based on the assumption that Council Tax would be frozen and that average Housing Revenue Account rents would increase by 4.91% in 2014/15.

The annual budget process commenced with the Financial Issues Paper (FIP) being presented to this Committee on 19 September 2013. The paper was prepared against the background of cuts in public expenditure, ongoing difficulties within the economy and highlighted the uncertainties associated with Central Government Funding, Business Rates Retention, Welfare Reform, New Homes Bonus, Development Opportunities, Reducing Income Streams, Waste and Leisure Contract Renewals and Organisational Review.

In setting the budget for the current year it had been anticipated using £44,000 from the general fund reserves. The limited use of reserves in 2013/14 was not significant as the MTFS at that time was predicting the use of just over £1.3 million of reserves to support spending in the following three years.

The revised four year forecast presented with the FIP took into account all the additional costs known at that point and highlighted the additional reductions in support grant and the potential top-slicing of New Homes Bonus. The projection showed a need to achieve net savings of £700,000 on the 2014/15 estimates, followed by £700,000 in 2015/16 and 2016/17 and £200,000 in 2017/18 to keep revenue balances above the target level at the end of 2017/18. The FIP established the following budget guidelines for 2014/15: the ceiling for CSB net expenditure be no more than £14.07million including net growth/savings; the ceiling for DDF net expenditure be no more than £0.142million; and the District Council Tax would be frozen.

The Director of Finance and ICT reported that the 2013/14 financial year had new locally retained business rates, vastly reduced Revenue Support Grant and Local Council Tax Support (LCTS). The Formula Grant had reduced by £2.66million or 31% over the last three years and from 2014/15 the Formula Grant had not been separately identified so a different comparison was needed. The draft figure for 2014/15 of £6.375million was slightly higher than the previous figure of £6.290million but the 2015/16 figure at £5.393million was slightly lower than the previous figure of £5.40million. The funding position in 2015/16 was £735,000 worse than had been anticipated in the February 2013 MTFS and this had been allowed for in the MTFS. Local Council Tax Support based on the draft settlement, was proposed to reduce the funding to parish councils by 12.5% for 2014/15 (£40,034) and 15.4% for 2015/16 (£43,156).

The predicted total amount of non-domestic rates for 2013/14 had been set as £31,888,336, from which the Council retained less than £3million, due to the tariffs imposed by Central Government. These tariff amounts within the system were now fixed for an extended period and the DCLG had stated that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.