Agenda item

The Council has to adopt a budget for 2012/13 as the basis for calculating its level of Council Tax and has to base that budget on its plans for service delivery during the year, recognising any changes in service demand that may arise in future years. 

Between September and December 2011, the Resources and Performance Scrutiny Board undertook a review of the budget. The budget scrutiny process for 2012/13 has involved a review of the current budget for 2011/12 of £15.8m with a detailed review of Discretionary areas of spend.  Discretionary spend for Cherwell District Council in 2011/12 totalled a net expenditure of £3.1m (27% of the Council’s net budget) and the capitals bids received as part of the 2012/13 process. The recommendations and conclusions from the Resources and Performance Scrutiny Board, which were agreed by the Board on 22 November 2011 and considered by Executive on 6 December 2011, are attached at Appendix 1 for information.

The Head of Finance will update Members on the outcome of the Executive’s consideration of the recommendations and conclusions.

At the Board’s November meeting, Members had deferred consideration of the following items:

1. Capital Bids

i.         Cherwell Community Led Housing Project - The Board agreed that in principle the proposal was sound and was minded to recommend the bid for approval but requested additional information be provided.

ii.       Community Intelligence Hub – The Board requested that this bid be re-evaluated and brought back to the Board’s January meeting for consideration

iii.      Telephony Development - Members requested that additional information relating to this bid be submitted to the Board’s January meeting for consideration

2. Communications – Controllable / Uncontrollable costs

The Board noted that a full review of the service was being undertaken. Members requested that officers bring proposals detailing how the service could save 25% of its controllable budget to the Board’s January 2012 meeting for consideration

3. Linked to Communications, Members requested that officers consider savings related to Cherwell Link

An exempt briefing pack on these items will be circulated to Board Members under separate cover.

The final budget will be presented to Council on 22 February 2010.

Recommendations

The Resources and Performance Scrutiny Board is recommended:

(1)       To consider the additional information and make recommendations to the Executive accordingly.

The Chairman opened the discussion with a brief resume of the work that the Resources and Performance Scrutiny Board had undertaken to review the 2012/13 budget.  The budget scrutiny process for 2012/13 had involved a review of the current budget for 2011/12 of £15.8m with a detailed review of discretionary areas of spend, a review of staff savings suggestions and the capital bids received as part of the 2012/13 budget process.

The Resources and Performance Scrutiny Board had agreed a number of recommendations, conclusions and comments at their 22 November 2011 meeting which had been considered and endorsed by the Executive as part of draft 1 of the 2012/13 budget at their meeting on 6 December 2011. There were a number of areas where the Board had deferred making recommendations and had instead requested further information.

i.        Capital Programme 2011/12

At the Board’s November meeting, Members had agreed that capital Bid 16, Cherwell Community Led Housing Programme, should be recommended for inclusion in the capital programme 2012/13 subject to officers circulating additional information (including the report to Executive in May 2010 and modelling) to Members of the R&PSB and them being satisfied with the additional information. Members were satisfied with the supplementary information provided and agreed that the Finance Scrutiny Working Group should retain a watching brief on the Programme.

Members had agreed to defer making a recommendation on Bid 2 Community Intelligence Hub and had requested that officers rescore the bid taking into account their queries regarding potential efficiency savings, whether the bid represented an invest to save opportunity and whether there may be any other contributions available for the Hub. The Head of Finance and Procurement circulated a briefing note which outlined how the bid could be considered as a spend to save initiative. Members raised concerns about the achievability of the savings and noted that as the proposal was principally for the use of the Joint Management Team, the costs of the Hub should be split. The Board noted that due to the shared arrangements currently in place and anticipated future shared arrangements, it was likely that shared bids would be submitted. Members agreed that a process for considering such bids should be developed. The Board agreed to defer making a recommendation on Bid 2 and agreed instead that officers be requested to develop a process for considering joint bids. 

The Board had deferred making a recommendation on Bid 17, Telephony Development at their November meeting. The Head of Finance and Procurement reported that this bid had now been withdrawn by the Head of Community Services.

The Head of Finance and Procurement advised the Board that four additional bids had been received by the Capital Programme Monitoring Group for consideration in the 2012/13 budget: Environmental Improvements in Grimsbury; Buildings at Risk Intervention Fund; Environmental Improvements in Market Square, Bicester; and, Shop Front Improvements.

The Board was satisfied with the supporting information presented for the bid relating to Environmental Improvements in Grimsbury. Members noted that it was highly recommended and agreed that the scheme was essential due to the existing health and safety threat. The Head of Finance and Procurement advised the Board that funding for the project would come from Banbury Town Council, Oxfordshire County Council and Cherwell District Council. It was anticipated that all of CDC’s funding would be contributed in 2012/13. Members agreed that the bid should be recommended to Executive for approval but stressed the need for appropriate planting.

In introducing the bid for the capital scheme ‘Buildings at Risk Intervention Fund’, the Head of Finance and Procurement explained that the purpose of this bid was to provide the Council with a ‘fighting fund’ to back up any threat of serving an Urgent Work Notice or a Repairs Notice on the owners of a Building at Risk. Members noted that whilst the bid had been deemed highly recommended, the project score had been relatively low. Members commented that it would have been useful to have had supplementary information, including, the amount spent in this area in the past five years and whether any buildings had already been identified for such a fund. Members considered the feasibility of establishing a reserve as part of the reserve fund to cover this kind of eventuality. The Board agreed that they would not recommend the bid for approval but they would recommend that a buildings at risk reserve be created as part of the reserve fund and requested that bids over £50k be presented to the R&PSB for consideration.

In considering the capital bid for Environmental Improvements in Market Square, Bicester the Board noted that environmental enhancements had been proposed in Market Square, Bicester since the publication of the Adopted Local Plan in 1996 and that the Council has had a budget allocation for the project for many years. The Head of Finance and Procurement advised Members that it was anticipated that implementation for the project would be in 2014/15 and that Oxfordshire County Council would also contribute. The Board agreed that the bid should be recommended for approval as the funds would then be formally earmarked and demonstrate CDC was committed to contributing to the project.

The Head of Finance and Procurement introduced the bid for Shop Front Improvements and explained that the aim of the project was to improve the quality of shop fronts in key retail areas in Banbury and Bicester to act as a regeneration tool. Members noted that the bid had been scored relatively low and deemed ‘desirable’. In considering the bid Members agreed that whilst they were not averse to such a project, they felt that in the current economic climate it was not a priority area for expenditure and perhaps the local business community should be funding the proposed initiative. Members noted that the bid made reference to ‘Shop Front Guidelines’ and queried what these were. Members also queried how the money would be allocated, the criteria and the level of funding to individual shop fronts and localities. Members agreed that they would defer making a recommendation on the bid as they required additional information before they would able to make an informed decision. 

ii. Discretionary Expenditure 2012/13 Budget Scrutiny: Communications and Cherwell Link

The Head of Finance and Procurement reminded Members that discretionary spend for Cherwell District Council in 2011/12 totalled a net expenditure of £3.1m (27% of the Council’s net budget). 

In considering the discretionary spend area of Communications, Members had been advised that following the appointment of a Joint Communications Manager with South Northamptonshire Council, a full review of the service at both councils was being undertaken. The Board had requested that officers bring proposals detailing how the service could save 25% of its controllable budget to the Board’s January meeting for consideration.  The Board had also been advised that the distribution of Cherwell Link would be reviewed to feed into the 2013/14 budget. Members had suggested that external advertising could generate income for the Council and savings could be found through shared distribution with South Northamptonshire Council. Members requested officers to explore these options further.

In response to the Board’s deliberations and request for proposals that would reduce the Communications budget by 25%, the Head of Finance and Procurement submitted three options that had been identified for consideration. Each of the proposals related to changes to personnel, the distribution of Cherwell Link and service delivery to achieve savings.

The Board considered each of the proposals in turn. Members agreed that option three: retain four issues of Cherwell Link per year and target savings through joint working with South Northamptonshire Council, represented the best option to seek savings in this area at the present time. 

Resolved

(1)         That the following capital bids be recommended for inclusion in the capital programme 2012/13:

·        Cherwell Community Led Housing

·        Environmental Improvements in Grimsbury, subject to appropriate planting

·        Environmental Improvements in Market Square, Bicester

(2)         That the capital bid for a Buildings at Risk Intervention Fund not be included in the capital programme 2012/13 but that officers be requested to create a reserve buildings at risk fund as part of the reserve fund.

(3)         That the capital bid for Shop Front Improvement be deferred and officers be requested to supply further information on the bid and submit a supplementary bid in due course.

(4)         That, in terms of the discretionary spend area communications, officers be requested to retain four issues of Cherwell Link per year and target savings through joint working with South Northamptonshire Council