Agenda item

(Director of Finance & ICT) To consider the attached report (FPM-016-2013/14).

The Assistant Director (Accountancy) presented a report on the fees and charges to be levied by the Council in 2014/15 and what, if any, scope there was to increase particular charges.

The Assistant Director reported that, the Medium Term Financial Strategy highlighted the need to identify £2.3m savings as a result of the significant reductions expected in funding from central government and £700,000 was required in 2014/15. The September Consumer Prices Index (CPI) and Retail Prices Index (RPI) had recently been published at 2.7% and 3.2% respectively and this had been used as a guide for any proposed increase in fees and charges.

The Assistant Director stated that it was proposed to increase the fees and charges within the Office of the Deputy Chief Executive for services such as New Horizons, Sports Development, Museums and Arts and Lifewalks by 3.2%. Within Corporate Supports Services Directorate, Land Charge income was still very uncertain following the introduction of the Local Land Charges (Amendment) Rules 2010. The current costs were broadly in line with the fee charged, although the account itself was in deficit due to non-chargeable activities and the fact that personal searches were free but there was a cost attached to dealing with enquiries. The MOT income was subject to a maximum charge set by the Vehicle Operating Service Agency (VOSA) and although the Council’s fee had been set below this level, income had been dwindling for some time now and there may well be a deficit recorded. It was felt that some forms of licensing fees were generally below the prescribed level and did not recover the cost of provision, in some cases quite significantly, so it was therefore felt that these should be increased where appropriate.

The Cabinet Committee noted that the Development Control fee levels were controlled by Central Government and the levels of income were somewhat dependant on the economic climate and the number and size of planning applications. With regard to pre-application charges that apply to major applications, income was buoyant at the moment and the budget had been exceeded substantially. The fee could of been increased but there was a fear that if the fee was set too high pre-application advice might be forgone leading to more difficulties later in the planning process.  Building Control Fees were felt to be reasonable but income was well short of expectations and the account was likely to fall into deficit this year. A review of Building Control was to be undertaken and the level of fees and charges would need to form part of the review.

Within Environment and Street Scene Directorate, it was proposed that pay and display charges in the Council’s off-street car parks were revisited, as the charges had not been increased for five years and the study by Price Waterhouse Coopers in 2011/12 predicted that modest changes in the fee structure could boost income by more than £300,000. Pay and display car parking fees form the largest discretionary income stream to the General Fund and the current income estimate had been set at £747,000 and further work was being done on some proposals for a revised tariff structure. The bulk waste fee varied depending on the number of items being collected and given that the contract price increases annually it seemed reasonable that the fee itself should also be increased. The Council also needed to ensure that a trade waste service was available if required and SITA had proposed to increase the fees by 50p for both businesses and schools.

Finally, for the Housing Directorate, the Assistant Director informed the Cabinet Committee thatthe majority of fees and charges had been increased by RPI at 3.2%. However, in view of the current economic conditions, the Housing Portfolio Holder had proposed that a number of Housing-Related Fees and Charges be retained at their current levels and these had been highlighted in the attached schedule. The only proposed exception to a general increase of 3.2% was in respect of the charges for hardstandings on housing estates, which would be increased from £29.10 per annum to £82.00 per annum, representing around 20% of the Council garage rent.

The Cabinet Committee felt that the carpark tariff needed to be dealt with carefully as it would be unknown how the public would react to the changes in the tariff if they were increased

Recommended:

(1)        That the Cabinet Committee proposed that £150,000 General Fund savings target for the 2014/15 budget should come from additional income through an increase to fees and charges;

(2)        That officers could investigate options to increase the 10p charge of the Pay and Display car parks within the District to 20 p, be agreed;

(3)        That the proposed fees and charges for 2014/15, as set out in the Appendices attached, be approved; and

(4)        That the proposed schedule of Housing Revenue Account fees and charges for 2014/15 be approved.

Reasons for Decision

As part of the annual budget process changes to fees and charges need to be agreed.

Other options Considered and Rejected:

Where the Council had discretion on the level of fees and charges that the it sets there were many possible options open to the Council ranging between no increase up to applying quite large increases where possible.