Agenda Item: 8
Rother District Council
Report to
-
Council
Date
-
1 March 2010
Report of
-
Cabinet
Subject
-
References from Cabinet Meetings
The Council is asked to consider recommendations arising from the Cabinet meetings
held on 18 January and 15 February (there were no recommendations to Council at the
meeting held on 22 December 2009) as set out below.
CABINET – 18 JANUARY 2010
CB09/95.
(7.1)
DISTRICT COUNCILS’ NETWORK
Members were asked to consider whether the Council should join the
District Councils’ Network (DCN). The DCN had been running informally
for three years to raise the profile of District Council issues and promote
the good work of District Councils nationwide. It comprised an elected
Members’ sounding board and a Chief Executives’ working group. The
DCN had already generated some successes within the Local Government
Association (LGA) through lobbying in key areas such as planning fee
income and waste management.
The DCN was successfully launched at a Special Interest Group at the
LGA on 13 November 2009. The DCN was currently in negotiation with the
successor bodies to the Association of District Councils with a view to
gaining access to the balance of £2.8m that was understood to remain
following the creation of the LGA. The annual subscription level had been
set at £150 per annum.
Although Members agreed that the Council should take up the invitation to
join the DCN, there were some concerns expressed regarding the initial
budget, how it was going to operate and whether it would actually make a
difference. It was noted that as with all other outside bodies, especially
those to which the Council made a funding contribution or paid a
subscription, the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee would
consider the appointment on an annual basis and determine whether or not
it provided value for money. Members appointed to outside bodies were
also required to produce an annual report of the benefits to the Council and
the organisation of Member appointments. These processes would
monitor whether the annual subscription and benefit derived from
membership proved to be value for money or not.
RECOMMENDED: That
1)
c100301 – Cabinet.refs
the Council takes up Membership of the District Councils’ Network
for an annual subscription of £150;
1
2)
the District Council’s Network be added to the list of outside bodies
to which formal appointments are made;
3)
the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee be invited to
appoint the Leader of the Council as this Council’s Member
Representative as a standing appointment; and
4)
the Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee reconsider the
appointment on an annual basis, as with all other appointments to
outside bodies, to ensure that it continued to provide value for
money.
(Cabinet Agenda Item 7.1)
CABINET – 15 FEBRUARY 2010
CB09/104. ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN 2010: TARGETS
Members received and considered Minute IR&S09/04 arising from the joint
meeting of the Improvement and Resources and Services Overview and
Scrutiny Committee held on 25 January. The joint meeting had considered
in detail the Annual Performance Plan 2010 targets and Key Performance
Indicators (KPIs) to include within the Basket for special focus and
attention.
The Scrutiny Members had recommended that RM170b All Visits to
Museums be removed from the Basket of KPIs and replaced with NIS172
Percentage of Small Businesses Showing Growth. Cabinet acknowledged
the work and recommendations arising from the Scrutiny Committees’
deliberation and concurred with their recommendations. In addition,
Cabinet felt that the Basket needed to be augmented by KPIs that were
important to Cabinet Portfolio Holders and were key indicators of the
Council’s “corporate health”. It was therefore agreed that the following
indicators also be added to the Basket: RM30/12 Channel Shift; NIS 179
Efficiencies as % of total revenue; NIS14 Avoidable Contract; RM9 % of
Council Tax collected; RM16 % of Business Rates collected; and PAM 204
Planning Appeals.
RECOMMENDED: That
1)
the targets as set out in the report to the Scrutiny Committee be
approved as submitted; and
2)
the following Key Performance Indicators be included in the Basket as
priorities for performance improvement over 2010/11:






c100301 – Cabinet.refs
NIS 154 Net Additional Homes Provided;
NIS 155 Total New Affordable Homes;
NI 157 a, b and c Speed of Processing Planning Applications;
NIS 195 a Litter and NIS 195 b Detritus;
RM77 Housing Benefit Local Authority Error Overpayments as a %
of Total Spend;
NIS 172 Percentage of Small Businesses Showing Growth;
2






RM30/12 Channel Shift;
NIS 179 Efficiencies as % of total revenue;
NIS14 Avoidable Contract;
RM9 % of Council Tax collected;
RM16 % of Business Rates collected; and
PAM 204 Planning Appeals.
(Cabinet Agenda Item 6)
CB09/105. DRAFT REVENUE BUDGET 2010/2011
At its meeting on 22 December 2009, the Cabinet had considered the draft
2010/11 revenue budget. The budget proposals had been subject to
scrutiny at a joint meeting of the Improvement and Resources and Services
Overview and Scrutiny Committees on 25 January 2010. The results of
consultation with the Council’s citizen’s panel and business stakeholder
group on the draft budget proposals had generated 22 responses and a
summary document had been circulated separately to Members. It was
noted that all 22 responders would receive an individual reply and where
appropriate a response addressing their comments.
The Government had announced its final grant settlement on 20 January
2010 and the increase was £32,761 over the 2009/10 settlement that
represented an increase of just 0.5%. It was noted that due to the size of
the public sector debt created in supporting the economy, much
speculation was being made of future funding for local government with
forecasts of reductions between 10% and 20% over the next three years
from 2011/12. The report included a revenue budget forecast up until
2014/15 that indicated that there could be a potential shortfall of £3.5m
should the Government grant stay constant and Council Tax increases
pegged at 3% in line with the expected capping limit.
The Head of Finance advised that the changes made to the revenue
budget since December 2009 included:



A saving of £9,200 per annum had been achieved by the transfer of
bus shelter maintenance to special expenses for Bexhill and Rye;
Reduced income of £16,000 in respect of the concessionary travel
grant announced on 28 January 2010; and
A saving of £8,700 could be achieved by the cross-party proposed
waiver of the inflation increase for Members’ allowances suggested at
the joint Scrutiny meeting.
The Cabinet were not supportive of the proposal for Members not to accept
the annual uplift in allowances for 2010/11. On the basic allowance this
represented an increase of £163 gross per annum, per Member. It was
considered that the Council should take heed of the Independent
Remuneration Panel’s recommendations made prior to the 2007 elections.
These recommendations had subsequently been approved by full Council,
save for the removal of the proposed Special Responsibility Allowance for
the Chairman of the Audit Committee. Cabinet felt that Members should
have the personal choice to receive their annual uplift or not, like they
currently had personal choice whether to claim any allowances / expenses
c100301 – Cabinet.refs
3
at all. The Head of Finance agreed to canvass the views of all Members
on an individual basis and adjust the contingency amount accordingly to
meet any shortfall that this would create.
The net revenue budget had risen to £13,779,550. This represented a
1.6% increase in expenditure. The council tax for 2010/11 had been
proposed as £161.19 (Band D), representing an increase of £4.58 or
2.92%. This was within the Council Tax strategy adopted through the
Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) that recognised the need to
increase the Council’s Tax yield to better reflect the true cost of delivering
services and ensure a sound financial future that was acceptable within the
current capping regime.
The Value for Money Steering Group had commenced work reviewing
those areas of the Council that appeared to be high cost in comparison
with the Council’s Audit Commission nearest neighbours. The outcome of
this work would be reported to the Improvement and Resources Overview
and Scrutiny Committee during the coming year and beyond.
The Leader of the Council paid tribute to the work of the Head of Finance
and his Team for the prudent budget and thanked Members of the
Overview and Scrutiny Committees for their input to the process. The
Council had achieved a sound financial strategy which ensured
transparency over future changes to the revenue and capital budgets. The
Leader was very pleased that the Council has been able to deal with
continued very poor settlements from the Government and the fall in
interest rates, without impacting on the quality and scope of services being
delivered. However there remained a significant challenge to ensure that
savings were achieved at the same time as delivering on the investment in
the District as identified within the Corporate Plan.
RECOMMENDED: That:
1)
the level of special expenses as set out in Appendix D of the report be
approved;
2)
a net expenditure level for 2010/11 of £13,779,550 be approved;
3)
the level of reserves at Appendix C of the report be approved; and
4)
the council tax for 2010/11 at band D be set at £161.19.
(Cabinet Agenda Item 9.2)
CB09/106. TREASURY STRATEGY STATEMENT AND ANNUAL INVESTMENT
STRATEGY
The Council was required to set out its treasury strategy for borrowing and
to prepare an Annual Investment Strategy. The report set out the Council’s
policies for managing its investments and for giving priority to the security
and liquidity of those investments. New guidance had been issued by the
Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) and the
report gave details of the impact of those changes on the Council.
The Council was required to formally adopt the new CIPFA Treasury
c100301 – Cabinet.refs
4
Management in the Public Services Code of Practice which emphasised a
number of key areas highlighted within the report. In particular there was a
requirement that Members of the Audit Committee received formal training
and this programme of training was already underway internally, as well as
additional external training in due course. The strategy statement had
been prepared in accordance with the revised Code and a number of
revised reporting arrangements, in accordance with the new Code were
detailed within the report.
The suggested Treasury Management Strategy for 2010/11 was based
upon the treasury officers’ views on interest rates, supplemented with
leading market forecasts provided by the Council’s treasury advisor. The
report gave details of the following areas that the strategy covered:
treasury limits in force which would limit the treasury risk and activities of
the Council; Prudential and Treasury Indicators; the current treasury
position; the borrowing requirement; prospects for interest rates; the
borrowing strategy; policy on borrowing in advance of need, the investment
strategy; creditworthiness policy and policy on use of external service
providers.
It was concluded that the strategy proposed, together with the interest rates
forecast, were in line with the assumptions made when preparing the
2010/11 revenue budget. The costs of treasury operations were contained
within the 2010/11 draft budget. It was clear that low interest rates would
dominate next year and this would result in a significant draw on the
Interest Equalisation Reserve. Members were reassured that officers, in
conjunction with the Council’s fund managers and Treasury advisors,
would seek to achieve the best return whilst retaining the security of the
investment. This would however mean returns were likely to remain at
minimal levels in 2010/11.
RECOMMENDED: That
1)
the adoption of the revised CIPFA Treasury Management Code of
Practice 2009 as per the resolution in Appendix H to the report be
approved and incorporated into the Council’s Financial Procedure
Rules;
2)
the Treasury Management Policy Statement as set out in Appendix G
to the report be approved;
3)
the Treasury Management scheme of delegation as set out in
Appendix I of the report be approved;
4)
the Treasury Management role of the Section 151 Officer as set out in
Appendix J of the report be approved;
5)
the Treasury Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy for 2010/11
as set out in the report be approved, as submitted;
6)
the specified and non specified investment categories listed in
Appendix D of the report be approved;
7)
the Prudential and Treasury Indicators as set out in Appendix A to the
report be approved; and
c100301 – Cabinet.refs
5
8)
the Director of Resources be authorised to make any consequential
amendments to the Council’s Financial Procedure Rules and Scheme
of Delegation arising from the above recommendation.
(Cabinet Agenda Item 9.3)
CB09/107. CAPITAL PROGRAMME REVIEW 2010/11 TO 2014/15
During the financial year, the Capital Programme Monitoring Group had
met on a regular basis to review the progress of projects against the
current Capital Programme. The revised Capital Programme totalled
£19.5m and was fully funded and no new items had been added.
The main changes to the Programme were reported as:


The Housing Programme had been updated to reflect recent reviews
of the Council’s Empty Homes Strategy, Affordable Warmth Strategy
and the overall programme for private sector housing;
2 Housing Schemes had been removed from the Programme as they
were no longer going ahead (St James Place and Helensburgh,
Bexhill);
The remaining changes to the Programme related to re-profiling the spend
of a number of projects including the EPIC Project. It was noted that
although the Pretious Project at Northiam was completed some time ago,
the £300,000 set aside for this had yet to be released due to the joint use
agreement not yet being in place. Members were advised that “other”
capital receipts and “other contributions” covered a whole range of possible
sources and the exact funding makeup and source of capital programme
items would have been made available at the time of the originating report.
This detailed information was available to Members on request.
Members acknowledged that the Council had invested significantly in IT in
recent years to provide improved services to customers. The IT equipment
replacement programme was essential for the Council to ensure that it had
access to the latest technology to provide continuity and business
improvements to customers. It was noted that this was an area that would
be looked at by the Value for Money Steering Group in due course and, if
considered necessary, a scrutiny review.
With regard to the Next Wave Project, Members were asked to reaffirm
their previous approval to waive Contract Procedure Rules C1 to C8 in
order to agree the appointment of specialist contractor(s) for the
construction of the shelters and kiosk. This would ensure that no
unnecessary delays jeopardised the funding and delivery of the project. It
was also requested that the Director of Services be authorised to take all
other necessary action in connection with this matter subject to costs being
contained within the overall Next Wave capital programme provision.
It was confirmed that currently the Council had sufficient resources to meet
the cost of the Capital Programme until 2012/13 without recourse to
borrowing or alternative funding mechanisms such as leasing. This did not
c100301 – Cabinet.refs
6
however assume any future capital receipts from disposals or slippage in
the progression of schemes.
RECOMMENDED: That
1)
the revised Capital Programme at Appendices A and B to the
report be approved;
2)
the updated Capital Strategy shown at Appendix C to the report be
approved;
Cabinet also RESOLVED: That
3)
Contract Procedure Rules C1 to C8 be waived in respect of the
procurement of shelters and kiosks as part of the Next Wave
project and the Chief Executive be authorised, following
consultation with the Leader and Project Sponsor, to agree the
appointment of specialist contractor(s); and
4)
the Director of Services be authorised to take all other necessary
action in connection with this matter subject to costs being
contained within the overall Next Wave Capital Programme
provision.
(Cabinet Agenda Item 9.4)
CB09/108. EAST SUSSEX TRAVELLER STRATEGY
East Sussex County Council (ESCC) was currently consulting on a revised
East Sussex Traveller Strategy following Government guidance and the
partial review of the South East Plan. The last 5 year Strategy had been
adopted in 2004. It was noted that “persons with nomadic lifestyles” were
not a recognised group under the Race Relations Act (1976, amended
2000) and any reference to this group in the report should be disregarded.
The Strategy’s objectives were to work in partnership to strike a balance
between the needs of the settled and gypsy and traveller communities, to
address the accommodation needs and provide support to gypsies and
travellers. As community leaders, elected Members had a responsibility to
represent the voices of all sections of the community, including
championing the interests of gypsies and travelers, as well as those in
settled communities.
Members had previously considered the outcome of the partial review of
the South East Plan which had resulted in the requirement for 7 new
additional permanent pitches within Rother between 2006 and 2016. There
may also be the need for a further transit site to be identified within the
Hastings / Rother area. Site assessment work was underway to identify
suitable sites both by officers and the gypsy and traveller community
through private provision, subject to normal planning consents. This work
was part of the Local Development Framework (LDF) process and will be a
part of the Site Allocations DPD currently programmed to be submitted in
August 2011.
c100301 – Cabinet.refs
7
RECOMMENDED: That the draft East Sussex Traveller Strategy be
approved, as submitted to Cabinet.
(Councillors Mrs Hughes and Maynard each declared a personal interest in
this matter as elected Members of East Sussex County Council and in
accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct remained in the room
during the consideration thereof.)
(Cabinet Agenda Item 10.3)
CB09/109. PRIVATE SECTOR HOUSING RENEWAL STRATEGY 2008-2012 –
JANUARY 2010 UPDATED VERSION
Members considered the updated Private Sector Housing Renewal
Strategy that set the key aims for private sector housing that was last
adopted by Council in December 2008.
It was noted that the main changes related to the Housing Renewal
Financial Assistance Policy (previously named Housing Aid Policy) which
formed part of the strategy. The updated policy reinforced the previously
adopted policy switch from a grant to a loan regime for the majority of
discretionary assistance measures in order to allow flexibility in how the
Council funded financial assistance to ensure a greater level of repayment
and recycling of funds in the future. In exceptional circumstances, and
subject to resources, grants could still be available for applicants who were
deemed unsuitable for a loan product.
Three new financial assistance measures had also been introduced into
the policy in an attempt to increase the options available to meet private
sector housing priorities. Under the Housing Renewal Financial Assistance
Policy the Director of Services, in consultation with the Cabinet Portfolio
Holder had discretion to introduce and develop assistance that enabled
existing and new sources of funding to be targeted at eligible clients. This
would enable the Council to respond quickly to proposals, schemes, and
funding offered from time to time by other agencies and partner
organisations.
RECOMMENDED: That the updated Private Sector Housing Renewal
Strategy be approved and adopted, as submitted to Cabinet.
(Councillor Ganly declared a personal interest in this matter as a landlord
and in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct remained in the
room during the consideration thereof.)
(Cabinet Agenda Item 10.5)
Councillor C R Maynard
Leader of the Council
c100301 – Cabinet.refs
8