Contact your Parish Council
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
RECORD OF DECISION OF THE Cabinet
|
|
Decision Made: |
22 December 2010 |
STRATEGIC PLAN 2011-15
Issue for Decision
To consider a draft of the Council's Strategic Plan for public and member consultation. The Strategic Plan sets out the Council's priorities, focus for services and how services will be delivered for the next 4 years.
Decision Made
1. That the draft Strategic Plan 2011-15 be approved for consultation.
2. That the update on the Strategic Plan Action Plan for 2010-11 be noted.
Reasons for Decision
The draft Strategic Plan (attached at Appendix A to the report of the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive) sets out the Council’s vision and priorities for the next four years aligned with and in parallel to the Medium Term Financial Strategy. The priorities and outcomes in the plan have been developed over the course of the current municipal year taking into account the national, local and economic context in which the council operates.
The Development of the Plan
In developing the priorities for the next four years Cabinet and the Corporate Management Team have been clear that the Council needed to reduce its priorities to ensure it had a focused approach to service delivery. This has followed feedback from the Improvement and Development Agency during a recent peer review that the Council needed to be clearer on what was and what was not a priority and communicate this to staff and residents. An early part of the work involved reviewing the Council’s frontline services in a “pairwise” analysis as set out in the priorities section of the Plan. Following this exercise, Cabinet then reviewed national policies and local data considering residents’ views from sources such as the Place Survey and statistical information regarding the current picture of Maidstone. This data is set out in the pen portrait attached at Appendix B to the report of the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive.
As the plan has developed, careful note has been taken of the emerging priorities of the Local Strategic Partnership and the Ambitions for Kent to ensure there is synchronicity with the Council’s partners and avoid duplication. As these plans are finalised the draft Strategic Plan will be updated.
Nationally there have been a number of actions and proposed legislative changes that have impacted on the plan and the Council’s future direction. This has included substantial cuts in our budget and changes to our powers and freedoms. The Localism and Decentralisation Bill outlines 6 areas of action to create the Big Society and localism:
1) Lift the burden of bureaucracy
2) Empower communities to do things their way
3) Increase local control over public finance
4) Diversify the supply of public services
5) Open up government to public scrutiny
6) Strengthen accountability to local people
The draft Strategic Plan outlines the Council’s role; working with others to help build on our communities and build the big society. There are a number of actions that we have taken that support the six areas identified in the Bill. We will be publishing all our financial transactions from January 2011. The public were consulted regarding the budget for discretionary services and we have listened to them when reviewing how we deliver these services and how resources are allocated. The draft Strategic Plan outlines service design principles which aim to encourage and support the diversification of services and we will be holding our own localism events in the New Year to consider what it will look like for Maidstone.
We have taken note of the government’s review of national indicators, the withdrawal of the place survey and Cabinet and the Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s wish to reduce what we measure and report as a Council. We have significantly reduced our priorities, actions and performance measures. In an effort to ensure we look outwards and not upwards to measure our success, we will be consulting with the public to identify the priority services for them and measure customer satisfaction with these services.
Vision and Priorities
The draft Strategic Plan 2011-15 sets out three priorities and six outcomes for Maidstone.
Priorities
1. For Maidstone to have a growing economy
Maidstone will have a growing economy, with a range of employment and business opportunities. In essence, Maidstone is a good place to work and do business.
Outcomes
• a transport network that supports the local economy.
• a growing economy with rising employment, catering for a range of skill sets to meet the demands of the local economy.
2. For Maidstone to be a decent place to live
Maidstone continues to be a clean, attractive, well designed and built environment; a place where people want to live.
Outcomes
• decent, affordable housing in the right places across a range of tenures.
• continues to be a clean and attractive environment for people who live in and visit the borough.
3. Corporate and Customer Excellence
The Council will have a productive workforce with people in the right place at the right time, delivering cost effective services. Services will be affordable, delivered on time and to agreed standards in an accessible way.
Outcomes
• residents are not disadvantaged because of where they live or who they are, vulnerable people are assisted and the level of deprivation is reduced.
• the Council will continue to have value for money services that residents are satisfied with.
Service Design Principles
The Cabinet and Corporate Management Team have identified a set of service design principles to demonstrate how services will be designed. These will be used by managers during the service planning process and have informed the actions identified in the Strategic Plan. There are seven service design principles.
1. Residents and Businesses are the starting point for services; every service must be considered from the perspective of the citizen and delivered at the lowest possible level – a bottom-up approach.
2. We will enable service delivery and seek to commission services rather than deliver them ourselves wherever appropriate.
3. We will work with partners where there are economies of scale and to identify common solutions and shared services.
4. Services must achieve our priorities.
5. We will manage our services so no-one is disadvantaged because of where they live.
6. We will concentrate on delivering our core services, whilst recognising that there are areas we need to influence and work with others on to bring about change.
7. We will work together as one Council and with our partners to deliver change and manage expectation.
Performance Management and Consultation
Strategic actions and milestones have been developed for each priority outcome. In terms of measuring success, a performance scorecard has been included for each indicator. We have significantly reduced the performance indicators with 59 draft indicators proposed, 24 of which will be reported quarterly, 14 on a bi-annual basis and 21 annually. Staff and residents will be consulted on these strategic actions and measures to ascertain if they are right and if they will deliver the priorities and outcomes set out in the plan.
Consultation with residents will be undertaken through the website and face to face consultation with small focus groups. The results of the extensive budget consultation and comments received regarding savings and services have informed the development of the Strategic Plan, the prioritisation of services and spending.
Consultation events will be held with staff in January to inform them of the new priorities and to engage them in developing the council’s “strapline” for the Strategic Plan. There will also be a photography competition for staff asking them to enter photos that present how they view the Council’s proposed outcomes. These will be used in the final version of the Plan and in documents relating to the Strategic Plan and its broader dissemination.
The Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee will consider the budget and the Strategic Plan in January. Feedback from this meeting and the other consultations will be relayed to and considered by Cabinet in February, prior to the Plan’s submission to Council in March.
Performance Update on the Strategic Plan Action Plan 2010-11
In order to ensure effective development of the Strategic Plan for 2011-15, it is essential to assess delivery on the current objectives and actions set out for 2009-12. The strategic level progress update is outlined in the table below.
|
Key Objective |
Update |
|
Priority: A place to achieve, prosper and thrive |
|
|
1. Increase the prosperity of the borough by stimulating investment and working with existing businesses to create a distinctive local economy |
There are seven actions relating to this key objective of which one has been completed, three are not yet due and two have missed their deadlines. The Visit Maidstone website has been redesigned and was re launched in April. The Tourism Strategy is being implemented however some actions have missed the deadline. |
|
2. Raise skills levels and reduce worklessness, including matching the skills of the workforce to the needs of local business |
There are four actions within this objective of which two have missed their September deadlines the other two are not due until June 2011. The Senacre Skills Studio is progressing and is expected to be opened in 2011. |
|
3. Achieve regeneration focussing on enhancing the attractiveness of the Town Centre through initiatives like the High Street public realm projects |
There are eight actions relating to this objective of which 50% are progressing well and are not yet due to be completed, the remaining 50% have missed the deadlines set. The Town Centre Management Service Level Agreement has been drafted and has been sent to the Town Centre Management Board for consideration. A Regeneration Projects Group has been established and a report is expected to management team early in 2011. The Town Centre Action has been delayed due to the LDF. |
|
4. Improve outcomes for vulnerable people and minimise the negative effects of the recession |
There are six actions of which four have been completed and two are overdue. In relation to the Equity release pilot quarterly meeting have been set up and a pilot was successfully launched in January 2010. The Housing team have responded well to the recession and have absorbed recession impact minimisation measures into their regular processes including the Homelessness prevention fund and the County Court Debt Service the team also have influenced the 'Supporting People Strategy' to ensure services for vulnerable people are protected and introduced additional ways for people bidding of properties through the Home choice scheme. The LSP and Domestic Violence Forum hosted a Domestic Violence awareness event in November and a new Domestic Violence handbook has been distributed to relevant agencies. |
|
5. Reduce traffic congestion and support economic growth through the development of a sustainable transport strategy |
There are five actions for this objective, two have been completed and two are overdue. The infrastructure delivery plan and the possibility of high speed one for Maidstone are being discussed are part of the LDF which has been delayed. A decision was taken by Cabinet not to progress the All Saints Road Link proposals. |
|
Priority: A place that is clean and green |
|
|
6. Enhance the Council’s parks, green spaces and natural habitats through initiatives like the Mote Park improvement project |
There are three actions within this objective, two are overdue and one has been completed. The Heritage Lottery Funding has been confirmed for the Mote park Project. |
|
7. Maintain a clean and pleasant environment for people who live in and visit the borough |
There are six actions in this objective of which five have been completed, the remaining action is not due until March 2012. Two major campaigns have been delivered in first half of 2010 - 'Foul Play' for dog fouling and 'No Ifs No Butts' anti littering. Actions from the street cleansing review have been implemented. A number of the initiatives introduced as part of this review will be further developed but the actions from the review are now incorporated into the standard way of working. |
|
8. Reduce carbon emissions across the borough and improve air quality |
There are five actions for this objective, four are not due till March 2012. The Air Quality Action Plan was overdue but has now been agreed by the Cabinet Member. |
|
9. Reduce the Council’s carbon footprint and improve the use of other natural resources, whilst ensuring the Council is planning to adapt to climate change |
There are 12 actions relating to the Council's carbon footprint, four are overdue The Carbon Footprint for 2009/10 is currently being complied and a report outlining the year's performance should be with CMT by the end of November 2010 and thermo graphic surveys of Council building have been completed these results will now be used alongside those from Carbon Trust surveys to develop projects as part of the Carbon Management Programme. |
|
10. Reduce the amount of waste produced by local people and increase the proportion of waste reused or recycled |
There are four actions for this objective two of which have been completed, one is not yet due and the other is overdue. An education and promotion plan has been created for the implementation of the new food waste collections in partnership with WRAP (Waste and Resources Action Programme). Changes to the garden waste service, bulky collection service and weekend freighter have been successfully implemented. Separate weekly food waste collections are being introduced alongside fortnightly refuse collections in January. Due to the introduction of the separate food waste collections and fortnightly refuse collections, the focus group regarding the mixed dry recycling has been delayed until the other service changes have been implemented. |
|
Priority: A place that has strong, healthy and safe communities |
|
|
11. Improve social, economic and environmental outcomes for communities in priority areas |
There are six actions within this objective , two are not yet due and the remaining four are overdue. The Parkwood Neighbourhood Action Plan was adopted by Cabinet at its meeting on 10th November and the initial community halls audit was completed August 2010. |
|
12. Improve the health of people living in the borough and reduce health inequalities |
There are five actions for this objective of which two are overdue. |
|
13. Make people feel safer where they live |
There are five actions for this objective of which two are overdue. |
|
14. Engage communities so people have the opportunity to participate and have a real say in what happens in their local area |
There are six actions for this objective of which two have been completed, two are overdue and two are not yet due. The Volunteer Scheme is now fully up and running and a number of different volunteers are working in the Gateway on a daily basis. The Democratic Engagement Strategy is currently behind schedule.
|
|
Priority: A place to live and enjoy |
|
|
15. Encourage more adults and children to participate in sport |
There are five actions relating to this objective all of which are progressing well including the Maidstone's Dream Project and marketing of the leisure centre. None of the actions for this objective are due to be completed until March 2012. |
|
16. Improve the cultural offering of the borough through projects like the Museum East Wing Extension |
There are six actions relating to this objective as with above none of them are due at this stage however all are being progressed. The Cultural Strategy is being developed and how Maidstone is marketed is being investigated. |
|
17. Deliver enough of the right type of well designed new homes where they are needed, maximising the numbers of affordable homes |
There are seven actions relating to this objective, one have been completed, one is overdue and the rest are not yet due to be completed. The Housing Strategy is behind deadline but is due to Cabinet in December and the Strategic Housing Market Assessment has been completed. |
|
18. Improve the condition, accessibility and energy efficiency of existing housing , including reducing fuel poverty |
There are five actions relating to this objective, none of which have reached their deadline date and all of which relate to the way in which the team runs their service on a daily basis. |
|
19. Better meet the accommodation needs of the Gypsy and traveller community |
There is one action relating to this objective which is not due to be completed until March 2012. |
|
20. Improve the quality of the built environment including protecting the borough’s heritage and ensuring new developments are well designed |
There are four actions relating to this objective of which one is complete and three have missed their deadline. |
|
Priority: A place with efficient and effective public services |
|
|
21. Deliver more efficient and effective Council services and increase value for money |
There are nine actions relating to this objective of which four have missed their deadlines, two are complete and three are underway. Further opportunities for shared services are continuously investigated. |
|
22. Ensure people can access a wider range of services in ways that suit them |
There are four actions within this objective of which one has missed its deadline and three are not yet due. The Communication Strategy is currently being reviewed but is being co-ordinated with the vision and Strategic Plan and cannot therefore be completed until these are agreed. |
|
23. Improve the delivery of community services to local people through an effective Local Strategic Partnership |
There are four actions within this objective of which two have missed their deadlines, one is not due until March 2012 and one is complete. A response to the vision for Kent has been submitted in order to help decide the redirection and reallocation of resources to deliver SCS priorities and the delivery chain analysis is being raised through the LSP delivery groups. |
The updated action plan gives an update on the 127 actions set out in last year’s strategic plan action plan. The majority of actions are on target or being progressed. Key stages of the Mote Park regeneration bid have been completed, progress has been made in delivering accessible housing and changes have been implemented to the street cleansing service. A new food waste collection service will be implemented in January 2011 and a number of community projects delivered, particularly in promoting health and physical activity.
Alternatives considered and why rejected
The Strategic Plan sets out how the Council will deliver services for the next three years. It provides the route map for the council, for managers, Councillors and the public. Without such a plan the effectiveness of the Council would be significantly compromised and reduced.
Background Papers
The Strategic Plan 2009-12
The Strategic Pan 2010-11, Action Plan
|
Should you be concerned about this decision and wish to call it in, please submit a call in form signed by any two Non-Executive Members to the Head of Change and Scrutiny by: 5 January 2011 |
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
RECORD OF DECISION OF THE Cabinet
|
|
Decision Made: |
22 December 2010 |
MOTE PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Issue for Decision
To consider approval of financing and all related issues regarding the above project
Decision Made
That the allocation of capital funds of £524,802, to enable the implementation of the Mote Park Regeneration project, be approved.
Reasons for Decision
The Council applied for funding towards the Mote Park
Regeneration Project to the Parks for People Scheme, which is jointly
administered by the National Heritage Memorial Fund and the Big Lottery Fund
(HLF), in September 2009. The Stage 1 application was approved and funding
provided to progress to the detailed stage procedure.
After significant consultation with local people, Friends of
Mote Park and other stakeholders the Stage 2 application was produced and
submitted in June 2010. This Stage 2 bid was assessed by the HLF and on 30th
September 2010 a grant of £1,867,000 was awarded to the Council towards the
total cost of £2,505,752 for the restoration and site wide improvements in Mote
Park.
Initial forestry works are programmed to begin in Mote Park
in January 2011, with the main tendered works beginning in April 2011, taking
around 12 months to complete.
The details of how this project will be funded are as follows:
Heritage Lottery Funding £ 1,867,000
Section 106 Funding £ 100,000
Volunteer Funding (in kind) £ 13,950
MBC Capital Requirement £ 524,802
Total Phase 3 Project Cost £2,505,752
Section 106 funding to the value of £100,000 will come from
developer contributions that qualify to be used towards the Mote Park
Regeneration Project, over the next 15 months. The allocation of these funds to
this project would need to be approved by the Cabinet Member for Leisure and
Culture.
There will be an increase in revenue funding for Mote Park
over the next 10 years totalling £40,500. This is a result of the mechanical
sweeping of new paths and increased tree maintenance work and will be funded
from within existing parks budgets.
The detailed offer from the HLF requires that the Council
accept the offer within 21 days of receipt. The contract was signed by the
Cabinet Member for Leisure and Culture on 15th November 2010. The
cabinet member has also agreed, subject to Cabinet’s agreement to release the
funding, to the preparation and issuing of tenders for the works associated
with the scheme. The results of the tenders will be reported to the Cabinet
Member in due course.
However, this offer is different to previous HLF grants in
that it requires the Council to confirm that its financial contribution,
throughout the term of the project, is available within 28 days of the signing
of the agreement and hence, the request to Cabinet to release the capital
funding to implement the scheme. This confirmation needs to be received by HLF
before permission to start work on the project will be granted.
Following a press release by the HLF on 4th November 2010, entitled “Heritage Lottery Fund brings in new measures to help applicants in tough times”, officers met with the HLF officers for further guidance and to discuss the possibility of reducing the Council’s match funding requirement. The HLF confirmed that it would require a new application which would have to be entirely re-evaluated in competition with other new applications. Following this meeting and further discussion with the HLF officers, it is considered that the risk of losing the £1.86million grant offered by HLF, if this course of action is pursued, is too high.
By agreement the HLF has not signed and released the contact whilst the further discussions have taken place. However it is now appropriate for the contract to be completed and the capital monies released.
Alternatives considered and why rejected
Alternative action could be to not release the capital funding to the Mote Park Regeneration Project, this is not thought appropriate as there is high possibility that it would result in the HLF withdrawing their offer and the project would be unable to progress.
It would be possible to make an application for further grant following changes to the HLF funding criteria. However this process could put the whole project at risk and is not considered appropriate.
Background Papers
Record of Cabinet Decision “Mote Park Regeneration Scheme and its funding through a lottery bid” - 12th September 2008
The Mote Park Improvement Project Stage 1 and 2 submissions to the HLF Parks for People Scheme.
Report to Cabinet Member for Leisure and Culture regarding the agreement to sign the HLF agreement.
Maidstone Borough Council Strategic Plan 2009-12.
|
Should you be concerned about this decision and wish to call it in, please submit a call in form signed by any two Non-Executive Members to the Head of Change and Scrutiny by: 5 January 2011 |
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
RECORD OF DECISION OF THE Cabinet
|
|
Decision Made: |
22 December 2010 |
COUNCIL TAX 2011/12 - COLLECTION FUND ADJUSTMENTS
Issue for Decision
To agree the levels of collection fund adjustments
Decision Made
That the projected surplus on the Collection Fund as at 31
March 2011 relating to Council Tax, of £97,169, be split as follows, for the
purposes of setting the Council Tax for 2011/12:-
|
Authority |
Amount |
|
Maidstone Borough Council |
15,528 |
|
Kent County Council |
68,193 |
|
Kent Police Authority |
9,027 |
|
Kent & Medway Towns Fire Authority |
4,421 |
|
TOTAL |
97,169 |
Reasons for Decision
Members will be aware that this council is required to maintain a Collection Fund which accounts for all local tax payments. The income into the Fund along with Council Tax Benefit payments is used to pay the precepts to Kent County Council, Kent Police Authority, Kent Fire Authority and the equivalent demand from this council (which includes Parish Precepts).
For the Council Tax, which was introduced in 1993/94 it is necessary to assess on an annual basis, the likely balance on the Collection Fund as at 31 March of the current financial year. Any balance, either positive or negative, must be taken into account in the following financial year. However, the balance on the fund, under the statutory conditions relating to Council Tax, does not become a credit or charge on this council solely but needs to be split proportionately between Kent County Council, Kent Police Authority, Kent Fire Authority and this Authority on the basis of the demand or precept in the current financial year.
The current situation regarding Council Tax in 2010/11 is detailed in Appendix A to the report of the Head of Finance and Customer Services. This Appendix details the original estimated level of Council Tax income for the year, net of exemptions and discounts, to pay for precepts and demands on the Fund. This totals £89,227,337.
Appendix A to the report of the Head of Finance and Customer
Services also details the latest situation regarding Council Tax bills
despatched, incorporating exemptions and discounts. Total income is now
anticipated to be £89,309,028; therefore a small surplus of £81,691 is
anticipated for 2010/11. The Collection Fund has produced this small surplus
due to the continuing increase in properties on the valuation list although
this is at a reducing rate reflecting the current economic climate. The impact
of this is reflected in the tax base report considered by General Purposes
Committee on 9th December 2010. The projection also includes an
allowance for properties that will come on to the valuation list up to March
2011.
The actual Council Tax surplus, as at 31 March 2010, was
£81,457 of which £65,979 was taken into account in setting the Council Tax in
2010/11. Therefore, there is a balance of £15,478 from 2010/11 and this must
be used in 2011/12 to reduce Council Tax liability.
In total it is estimated that there will be a Council Tax
Collection Fund surplus anticipated for 2011/12 of £97,169 at 31 March 2011.
This is fully detailed in Appendix A to the report of the Head of Finance and
Customer Services.
Based on the appropriate Government Regulations, this
estimated surplus must be used to reduce the level of Council Tax in 2011/12.
However, this surplus must be made available to this council, Kent County
Council, Kent Police Authority and the Kent and Medway Towns Fire Authority in
proportion to the level of demand and precepts in the current year. The
detailed factors are shown in Appendix A to the report of the Head of Finance
and Customer Services. Therefore the amount of the 2010/11 surplus relating to
each as follows:-
|
Authority |
Amount |
|
Maidstone Borough Council |
15,528 |
|
Kent County Council |
68,193 |
|
Kent Police Authority |
9,027 |
|
Kent & Medway Towns Fire Authority |
4,421 |
|
TOTAL |
97,169 |
Alternatives considered and why rejected
It is a statutory requirement that this adjustment is made using this calculation method.
Background Papers
None
|
Should you be concerned about this decision and wish to call it in, please submit a call in form signed by any two Non-Executive Members to the Head of Change and Scrutiny by: 5 January 2011 |
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
RECORD OF DECISION OF THE Cabinet
|
|
Decision Made: |
22 December 2010 |
STRATEGIC RISKS (DRAFT RISK REGISTER)
Issue for Decision
A new draft Strategic Risk Register has been prepared to reflect the proposed new prorities and to align with the Council's Strategic Plan for 2011 - 15. The Cabinet is asked to adopt the new Strategic Risk Register.
Decision Made
That the new draft Strategic Risk Register, as set out in Appendix A to the report of Corporate Management Team, be adopted.
Reasons for Decision
The Council has maintained a Strategic Risk Register for a number of years. The Register has contained the high level risks that, without proper and proactive management, would prevent the Council from delivering its key objectives.
The current year has been a period of significant change; the Coalition Government was elected in May and has since commenced a radical programme of reform of the public sector. This has been accompanied by the need to make significant cuts in public spending. Cabinet has been working on a draft Strategic Plan for 2011-15 which will set out new priorities for the Council. In these circumstances it has been necessary to create a completely new draft Strategic Risk Register to align with the new plan and to reflect the changed economic and political landscape.
The new draft Strategic Plan 2011-15 will set out three priorities:
· For Maidstone to have a growing economy
· For Maidstone to be a decent place to live
· Corporate and Customer Excellence
In order to achieve these priorities, a number of draft Strategic Outcomes have been identified whereby in 2014, Maidstone:
· has a transport network that supports the local economy
· has a growing economy with rising employment, catering for a range of skill sets to meet the demands of the local economy
· has decent affordable housing in the right places across a range of tenures
· continues to be a clean and attractive environment for people who live in and visit the borough
· residents are not disadvantaged because of where they live or who they are, vulnerable people are assisted and the level of deprivation is reduced
· the Council will continue to have value for money services that residents are satisfied with.
A risk workshop was held on 10 December 2010, which allowed Members of the Cabinet and the Corporate Management Team to identify the risks to the successful delivery of the draft strategic outcomes and create a new draft Strategic Risk Register. The workshop was informed by the work carried out earlier in the year by a risk consultant from Zurich Management Services and by the national report published in November 2010, by Zurich Municipal and Ipsos MORI, entitled ‘Tough Choices’.
The objective of the risk workshop was to specifically match the risks to the draft strategic outcomes.
The new (draft) Strategic Risk Register is as attached at Appendix A to the report of Corporate Management Team.
There will now be a process of consultation on the Strategic Plan 2011-15, which will include consideration by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. When the Strategic Plan has been finalized, the strategic risk register will be adapted as necessary to reflect the finalized Plan. The individual strategic risks will then be allocated by Management Team to a ‘risk owner’. Management Action Plans will then be developed. The risk owner will be required to report progress to Corporate Management Team on a quarterly basis as part of the Performance Management reporting cycle.
Audit Committee
The Audit Committee has responsibility ‘to monitor the effective development and operation of risk management’. A report will therefore be provided to the meeting on 21 March 2011, setting out the process for identifying and managing the strategic and operational risks.
Financial Risk
The draft Strategic Risk Register contains a number of references to financial risk and reduced resources which might affect the ability of the Council to deliver its priorities. In addition, the Head of Finance and Customer Services has prepared a separate ‘Financial Management Risk Register’, which covers all aspect of financial management. This register will be monitored and if the risks start to materialize, will result in an escalation to strategic level with a resulting report to Corporate Management Team. This will help to ensure a robust and prudent approach is taken to future financial planning, in an uncertain financial climate.
Operational Risks
Operational Risk Registers will be developed by service managers as part of their service planning. These service risks will be entered to the performance management system, Covalent, where they can be managed and monitored. There will be a facility for escalating the reporting process should it be necessary to raise any of the risks to a strategic level.
Alternatives considered and why rejected
It is vital that the Council identifies its key strategic risks and puts in place the necessary actions to manage the risks. A failure to identify and manage strategic risks would bring into question the adequacy of the Council’s governance and general management processes.
Background Papers
Tough Choices: Different perspectives on long-term risk facing the public sector and wider civil society, Zurich Municipal and Ipsos MORI.
|
Should you be concerned about this decision and wish to call it in, please submit a call in form signed by any two Non-Executive Members to the Head of Change and Scrutiny by: 5 January 2011 |
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
RECORD OF DECISION OF THE Cabinet
|
|
Decision Made: |
22 December 2010 |
AMENDMENT TO LEASE PROPOSAL FOR BEECHWOOD HALL
Issue for Decision
To consider amendments to the lease arrangements for Beechwood Hall.
Decision Made
1. That a lease be granted to the Beechwood Community Hall Trust Limited Management Committee for the New Beechwood Community Hall at Barming for one year, pending the outcome of the Community Halls audit.
2. That the Head of Legal Services be given delegated authority to enter into the lease on terms agreed by the Assistant Director of Regeneration and Cultural Services.
Reasons for Decision
Beechwood Community Hall (also known as Oakwood Community Hall) has been built by Persimmon Homes as part of a section 106 requirement arising from their development of the former Oakwood Hospital site. The Hall is designated for community use and has been transferred to the Council. Schedule 10 of the Section 106 agreement requires the Council “not to use the property other than as a community hall for the use and benefit of the community local to the property and not for any other purpose.”
It was agreed in the Report of 17 December 2009 to the Cabinet Member for Leisure and Culture that once the hall is transferred from the developers to the Council that the operation and management of Beechwood Hall would be undertaken by the Beechwood Community Hall Trust Limited Management Committee by way of a 25 year lease. The Management Committee was established using the national guidelines produced by Action with Communities in Rural England and the model 1b lease is the recognised national standard lease accepted by the Charity Commission for the operation of Community Buildings.
It was agreed that in return for a peppercorn rent and a long lease, the lessees would take on the responsibility for repair and maintenance of the building and for the utility bills. Within a one year lease, the Council would remain responsible for repairs to the building, which is a financial risk to the Council during the year. Buildings insurance would be the responsibility of the Council, recharged to the lessees.
However, since that decision, the Council has adopted the Community Asset Transfer Strategy, the purpose of which is to provide fair access to community facilities across the Borough and to ensure that provision is consistent without any gaps or duplication. The impact of this is that the Beechwood Hall should be assessed with all the others. That Audit is in the process of being finalised and if it confirms that the Hall is still required and is suitable for transfer, then the Council would seek to transfer it through the Asset Transfer process. This approach has been taken in relation to Fant Hall which has also been granted a one year lease.
If the Hall is needed and suitable for transfer, it would require a tenant to manage the hall but it was recommended that all Halls currently remaining in Council ownership should follow the nationally accepted Community Asset Transfer (CAT) process developed by the Asset Transfer Unit, with assistance from the Development Trust Association and Community Matters, as a standard requirement of transferring ownership. This process requires a business case to be prepared which will demonstrate that the proposal is viable and sustainable and that the transfer of ownership will deliver sufficient community benefits. The business case would be produced by the potential lessees with assistance from Council Officers who will draw up the terms of the lease/service level agreement.
Persimmon Homes transferred the freehold interest of Beechwood Hall to the Borough Council in January 2010. However, because of the development of the Strategy and the work on the Audit it was recommended that the Council seek to offer a one year lease, to enable the work on the Audit to be completed and the need for the Halls in Council ownership to be agreed along with the mechanism to manage them into the future. The Audit report will be available in the first quarter of the New Year.
Alternatives considered and why rejected
The Cabinet could decide not to agree to the short term lease and decide that the full 25 year lease arrangement as originally agreed should be entered into with the Beechwood Community Hall Trust Limited. This is not thought appropriate as the Council has committed to review community hall provision and implement the Community Asset Transfer Strategy, where possible, and this needs to be done consistently across the borough.
Background Papers
Record of Decision of the Cabinet Member for Leisure and Culture 30 December 2009
Cabinet report on Community Asset Transfer 2009
|
Should you be concerned about this decision and wish to call it in, please submit a call in form signed by any two Non-Executive Members to the Head of Change and Scrutiny by: 5 January 2011 |
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
RECORD OF DECISION OF THE Cabinet
|
|
Decision Made: |
22 December 2010 |
CABINET MEETING DATES - 2011/12
Issue for Decision
To consider the Cabinet meeting dates for the municipal year 2011/12
Decision Made
Reasons for Decision
The dates for the Cabinet meetings follow the existing pattern of meetings on the second Wednesday in every month.
There are two slight adjustments to the existing pattern:-
· In previous years the first meeting of the municipal year has been held at 4.00 pm on the day after the Annual Meeting. However, last year the Cabinet Meeting was expected to be long due to the number of reports and would, therefore, clash with Planning Committee which was due to commence at 6.00 pm. It was therefore recommended that, to avoid any possible future clash, the first Cabinet Meeting is held at 6.30 pm on the same day as the Annual Meeting.
· The December meeting is on the third Wednesday (21 December 2011) to ensure the required financial information for the budget report is available.
Alternatives considered and why rejected
It is for the Cabinet to determine their own dates and times for their meetings.
Background Papers
None
|
Should you be concerned about this decision and wish to call it in, please submit a call in form signed by any two Non-Executive Members to the Head of Change and Scrutiny by: 5 January 2011 |
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
RECORD OF DECISION OF THE Cabinet
|
|
Decision Made: |
22 December 2010 |
BUDGET STRATEGY 2011/12 ONWARDS
Issue for Decision
To agree a draft Council Tax and Budget Strategy for 2011/12 onwards
Decision Made
1. That a provisional spending level of £20.21 million for 2011/12 and a Council Tax freeze in line with the Government’s proposal be agreed.
2. That working balances be set at £2.3million at this time and to monitor this level as part of the standard budget monitoring during 2011/12.
3. That the draft medium term financial strategy as set out in Appendix G of the report of Management Team and its connection to the draft strategic plan be noted.
4. That the results of the budget consultation be noted.
5. That the changes to the budget pressures as set out below be agreed:-
|
|
2011/12 £000 |
2012/13 £000 |
2013/14 £000 |
2014/15 £000 |
|
Reduced Income from Regeneration |
|
|
-230 |
+230 |
|
Pension Fund Valuation |
-500 |
-500 |
-500 |
|
|
Concessionary Fares |
-150 |
|
|
|
|
Refuse & Recycling |
|
|
-300 |
|
|
Local Development Framework |
-400 |
|
|
|
|
Homelessness Strategy |
-70 |
|
|
|
|
Cost of Borrowing |
-150 |
|
+150 |
|
|
Loss of Income |
-50 |
|
|
|
|
Growth Provision |
+100 |
|
|
|
|
|
-1,120 |
-500 |
-880 |
+230 |
6. That the revised strategic projection, as set out in Appendix A of the report of Management Team be agreed.
7. That payment by annual instalment of the Council’s contribution to fund the pension fund deficit for the three years 2011/12 to 2013/14 as set out below be agreed:-
|
|
£,000 |
|
2011/12 |
1,206 |
|
2012/13 |
1,260 |
|
2013/14 |
1,325 |
8. That the savings identified in Appendix B of the report of Management Team be agreed.
9. That the proposed additional use of balances, as detailed in Appendix D of the report of Management Team, be agreed.
10. That the provisional Capital Programme, as detailed in Appendix C of the report of Management Team, be agreed.
Reasons for Decision
At the July meeting, Cabinet considered the initial budget projection for 2011/12 onwards, based on the financial information available at that time, and agreed the following:
a)
That for planning purposes, the Council Tax increase for 2011/12 and
future years be set at 2.5% to inform the strategic projections provided in
Appendix F of the report of Management Team;
b)
That the scenario to be adopted is the “most likely” as outlined in the
strategic projections in the report of Management Team;
c)
That the extent of the Capital Programme for 2011/12 onwards be noted;
d) That the timetable for the Budget Strategy 2011/12 be noted.
The initial financial projection was selected by Cabinet as the most likely of three scenarios. The key assumptions from that scenario were:
a) An inflation rate of 2% per annum over the period, but dropping to 1% in years 2 and 3;
b) Anticipated grant reductions of £3.2m or 32% over four years. This was assumed to be evenly spread over the four years;
c) Additional resources would be required for a number of initiatives including the Local Development Framework, the homelessness strategy and the leisure centre;
d) A continuation of the annual increase in the national concessionary fares scheme, to facilitate transitional costs of the transfer of the scheme to KCC;
e) The use of all available capital receipts to fund the capital programme, reducing the level of investment income;
f) A need to borrow up to £2.0m to finance capital expenditure, creating a need for revenue resources to service the debt;
g) That the current policy to maintain a minimum balance of 10% of net revenue spend is maintained;
h) That future Council Tax increases be equivalent to the 2010/11 increase for the purpose of developing the strategy;
i) That
a 0.5% increase in the Council Tax Base be assumed;
j) That the triennial review of the pension fund would produce a valuation that required an increase in the Council’s contribution equivalent to £0.5m per annum for three years.
A number of risks were identified as part of the initial projection as follows:
a) The uncertainty surrounding the spending review and its effect upon the formula grant assumptions made in the strategy;
b) The potential non-delivery of the capital receipts from the sale of assets assumed during the programme period, leading to the possible need for additional borrowing to finance the capital programme.
c) The potential future loss of Homes and Community Agency (HCA) grant aid to the Council’s capital programme following the intensive investment programme since 2008/09.
d) The continuing risk of an income shortfall on the revenue budget due to the recession.
Following these decisions a further report to agree the approach to budget consultation for 2010/11, was approved by Cabinet.
Economic Background
The recession has had a significant impact upon the Council
over the past three years. This impact has led to major changes in the
Council’s financial strategy. This is most noticeable in its effect upon the
income levels achieved by Council services.
By the end of 2010/11 the Council will have reduced budgeted
expectations of income generation by £2.1m per annum. The mid year projection
suggests that this reduced target will be achieved. The projection was
previously reported to Cabinet as part of the second quarter’s budget
monitoring report.
The economic indicators for October 2010, the most up to
date indicators available at the time of writing, give a mixed message on the
strength of the economy.
a) Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation rose to 3.2% (3.1% previous month)
b) Retail Price Index (RPI) inflation fell to 4.5% (4.6% previous month)
c) In the quarter to September 2010, the economy grew by 0.8% (1.2% in previous quarter)
d) Unemployment
fell to 2.45m or 7.7% of the economically active population in September 2010
(down 17,000 from a year earlier)
The CPI reported above is more than 1% above the Government’s 2% target. To place the current position into context with the recession the chart below plots CPI and RPI as annual percentage increases (or decreases) over the period since April 2008. As can be seen, the indices have fluctuated but have recently remained above 2% for a significant period.
At the time of writing the Office of Budget Responsibility predicts current year growth as 1.8%, then 2.1% and 2.6% in the following two years, 2011 and 2012. The CBI, however, see these figures as optimistic.
The economy will be affected by the Government’s actions as
part of the spending review announced in October 2010. The expectation
nationally is that borrowing will be held just below £150 billion for the
year. In future years public sector spending reductions will remove £103
billion of this annual borrowing.
The intended result of the combined effect of economic
growth and a reduced annual deficit is to stabilise the economy and enable a
rise out of the recession. The major risk to government strategy is that
reduced public sector spending may adversely affect economic growth.
Economists’ views on this matter are very mixed at this time.
Review of 2010/11 to date
Cabinet has received two quarterly monitoring reports for
2010/11 in August and October 2010. It is clear from these reports that
management action has ensured the current year’s budget is resilient, enabling
a stable base for future financial pressures to be addressed by the Council.
The mid year variance was reported to Cabinet in October
2010 as a favourable variance of £0.75m. A number of significant issues were
identified that, in the main, related to time limited issues. Examples
included an underspend on concessionary fares which will be the responsibility
of the County Council from April 2011 and a business rates rebate for the Tonbridge
Road property that has been demolished and will incur no future costs to the
point of sale.
The Capital Programme, as approved by Council in March 2010,
has been revised during this financial year by Cabinet’s approval of slippage
to future years. The current programme was last considered by Cabinet in
November 2010 and expected expenditure in year has reduced to £8.2m. In
addition the resources required to finance this reduced level of capital
expenditure in 2010/11 are available to the Council. This is primarily due to
the fact that the proceeds from the sale of Armstrong Road Depot have been
received.
This slippage does not affect the overall programme for
2010/11 to 2012/13 as the majority of change relates to the re-profiling of
scheme costs between years. This means prudential borrowing or additional
capital receipts of £2.4m will still be required by 2012/13 based on current
funding assumptions. This issue is considered further in section 1.9 which
discusses the future Capital Programme.
Revenue balances continue to achieve the Council’s policy of
a minimum of 10% of net revenue spend after provisional allocation and use as
approved by Council in March 2010. One significant variance to the use
approved by Council in March 2010 is that there is no longer a requirement to
repay VAT on exempt supplies, estimated at £0.2m as a consequence of the major
works at the crematorium in 2009/10. This balance is now an additional
uncommitted resource.
Along with the quarterly budget monitoring reports Cabinet has received quarterly performance reports during the year. At September 2010 the Council’s performance showed that 82% of KPIs and LPIs are forecast to end the year at or above target. This is slightly down on the achievement reported to September 2009.
Review of Strategic Projection
In July 2010 Cabinet considered three scenarios for the
strategic projection and approved their favoured option. This scenario has
been used to complete all work since that time and all consultation.
Attached at Appendix A to the report of Management Team is a
revised strategic projection. Since July a number of factors have changed. The
major change is that, following the announcement of the four year spending
review, both the medium term financial strategy and the strategic plan have a
minimum four year outlook. Specific changes since July 2010 that affect the
four year period are given in the table below:
|
|
2011/12 £000 |
2012/13 £000 |
2013/14 £000 |
2014/15 £000 |
|
Reduced Income from Regeneration |
|
|
-230 |
+230 |
|
Pension Fund Valuation |
-500 |
-500 |
-500 |
|
|
Concessionary Fares |
-150 |
|
|
|
|
Refuse & Recycling |
|
|
-300 |
|
|
Local Development Framework |
-400 |
|
|
|
|
Homelessness Strategy |
-70 |
|
|
|
|
Cost of Borrowing |
-150 |
|
+150 |
|
|
Loss of Income |
-50 |
|
|
|
|
Growth Provision |
+100 |
|
|
|
|
|
-1,120 |
-500 |
-880 |
+230 |
Further detail of each category of change is given below:-
a) Reduced
income from regeneration provided for the consequences of work on regeneration
from a more focused use of some Council resources. Current plans no longer
require the single year investment of £0.23m.
b) Pension
fund valuation provided for the expected increase in employer contributions to
the pension fund. A successful year by the pension fund, maintained by Kent
County Council, together with recent changes nationally, such as connecting
future increases to CPI inflation and the move to increase the state pension
age, have meant that the value of the fund in 2010 is similar to the value in
2007. The consequence of this is that the Council does not need to increase
its contribution towards the deficit.
c) Concessionary
fares provided for transitional and residual costs of the transfer of the
service to Kent County Council in 2011/12. Likely residual costs have been
identified and funded from within current resources and transitional costs, if
they occur, can be covered by the unallocated resources within balances.
d) Refuse and
recycling provided for a future increase in cost at the time of the new
contract. At this time it is considered that the new contract in 2013 will not
require growth, due to the potential for planned services changes.
e) Local
Development Framework (LDF) work was previously funded from balances. These
balances were transferred to finance the Council’s work on the Kent
International Gateway. The previous strategic financial projection assumed
£0.4m growth for the LDF, but this is a one-off funding requirement. This has
been removed and replaced with a proposal for a £0.4m allocation from balances.
f) Homelessness
strategy provided replacement funding for a grant that was expected to cease in
2011/12. The recent finance settlement announcement that this grant will not
only continue but be enhanced means there is no requirement to provide
alternative funding.
g) The cost
of borrowing provided for the possibility that up to £2m of prudential
borrowing would be required in 2010/11 and again in 2011/12. Although
possibility of prudential borrowing being required to complete the full capital
programme still exists, sale of assets and slippage in the programme during
2010/11 mean sufficient funding should be available for this year. This does
not remove the possible future need and the pressure has been moved to 2012/13
and 2013/14 rather than removed.
h) Loss of income provided for non-specific consequences of the recession on various income generating services. The Council has taken action each year of the recession to reduce its reliance on income in areas affected by the recession. As of 31 March 2011 the expected income from fees and charges has been reduced by over £2m since 31 March 2008. The budget monitoring for 2010/11 shows income generation to be matching this reduced target. This suggests the Council has matched expectation to demand and can reduce its assumptions relating to future losses.
i) The
growth provision has been amended to ensure that the one-off costs of achieving
organisational change can be funded.
Available Resources
The Council Tax
As part of its initial consideration of the MTFS in July
2010, Cabinet agreed to use a 2.5% increase in Council Tax plus a 0.5% increase
in the tax base as working assumptions.
At the meeting of the General Purposes Group on 9 December
2010, a tax base of 60,303.1 was set for 2011/12. This represents a 0.9%
increase over the tax base set for 2010/11. The working assumption agreed by
Cabinet in July 2010 was an increase of 0.5% which is equivalent to a tax base
of 60,064.0. The revised tax base of 60,303.1 results in an increase of
£53,000 in the base Council Tax position for 2011/12 before consideration of
any percentage increase.
As part of the spending review 2010 the Government
announced, in October, details of its council tax freeze proposal. The
proposal is a single year tax freeze (or reduction). Compensation is available
through a central government grant equivalent to a 2.5% increase in council
tax. This compensation is for four years only and cash limited to the value of
the first year’s grant.
The strategic projection at Appendix A to the report of Management Team uses the tax base agreed by General Purposes Group and assumes a Council Tax freeze in 2011/12 with the receipt of the cash and time limited grant detailed above. When compared to a model with an actual 2.5% increase in Council Tax in 2011/12, the Council’s resources will reduce by £62k which is the loss of that percentage increase over the four years of the grant. In addition, 2015/16 will require additional savings of £380k as a consequence of the loss of grant, a total loss of Council tax funding of £442k.
The Government is proposing legislation under the localism
bill to ensure Council Tax increases cannot be excessive without approval
through a local referendum. Until that time it is expected that the government
will use capping powers to limit increases. These matters combined mean that it
is unlikely that a later increase in Council Tax could compensate for the loss
of grant in 2015/16.
Revenue Support Grant
Following the Local Government Finance settlement
announcement on 13 December 2010 there have been significant changes to the
profile of the Revenue Support Grant.
Nationally, the announcement’s headline issues are:
a) A two year settlement with the second year remaining provisional.
b) The announcement of plans to adopt a new system of distributing local government funding from 2013; consultation to commence in early 2011.
c) A total reduction in grant from £28bn to £24.9bn in 2011/12 which is equivalent to a 12.1% real terms reduction.
d) An arrangement for the “tailored” distribution of grants that have previously been ring fenced.
e) An arrangement for transitional grant for authorities where “revenue spending power” reduces by more than 8.9%.
f) Changes to damping provisions including the categorisation of authorities into four groups, dependent upon the ratio of grant to Council Tax.
The Council’s specific settlement issues are:
a) A grant of £6.45m in 2011/12 and a provisional grant of £5.72m in 2012/13.
b) A reduction in grant for concessionary fares of £1.77m coupled with a loss of £0.47m from the Department for Transport.
c) A number of minor adjustments relating to other changes in responsibility, valued at a reduction of £56,495.
d) Damping at the level of the highest floor group creating a final reduction of -16.58% from the adjusted 2010/11 grant.
The two year settlement can be projected to cover four
years, based on the spending review data announced by central government in
October 2010. The grant reduction in each year, compared to the prediction
made in the July 2010 report to Cabinet is given below:-
|
|
Reduction in Grant July 2010 £000 |
Reduction in Grant Settlement £000 |
|
2011/12 |
-800 |
-1,282 |
|
2012/13 |
-800 |
-734 |
|
2013/14 |
-800 |
-69 |
|
2014/15 |
-800 |
-429 |
|
|
-3,200 |
-2,514 |
There are two major differences between the initial
projection and the settlement figures:
a) The
initial projection assumed an even spread of grant reductions however the
government has “front-loaded” reductions for local government in order to
protect other public services.
b) The initial projection assumed the reduction to the Council’s grant would be made before the transfer out of the £1.8m concessionary fares sum. The settlement reductions have occurred after the transfer, which has reduced the loss of grant to £0.7m.
Although the tailored distribution of grants previously ring fenced has not directly affected this Council, such changes will have affected Kent County Council. The potential negative impact of the County Council’s funding reduction will need to be considered and actions identified to mitigate the impact.
Budget requirement and Spending Level
Following the detailed analysis of the level of Council Tax and the settlement notification, it is possible to identify a provisional spending level or budget requirement for each year of the spending review as follows:
|
|
2011/12 £,000 |
2012/13 £000 |
2013/14 £000 |
2014/15 £000 |
|
Council Tax Collectable |
13,411 |
13,813 |
14,227 |
14,654 |
|
Council Tax Adjustment |
15 |
- |
- |
- |
|
Council Tax Grant |
335 |
335 |
335 |
335 |
|
Revenue Support Grant |
6,449 |
5,715 |
5,646 |
5,217 |
|
Budget Requirement |
20,210 |
19,863 |
20,208 |
20,206 |
Savings Target & Efficiency
The strategic projection approved by Cabinet in July 2010
required a total savings target of £7.4m over four years to 2014/15. The
revised strategic projection at Appendix A to the report of Management Team
takes account of all the changes detailed earlier in this report and identifies
a four year savings target of £4.3m. Due to the profiling of the reductions
this target is not evenly spread across the four years. The table below
compares annual figures from July 2010 with the current projection.
|
|
July 2010 £,000 |
Current £,000 |
|
2011/12 |
2,771 |
1,878 |
|
2012/13 |
1,647 |
1,068 |
|
2013/14 |
2,168 |
608 |
|
2014/15 |
844 |
773 |
|
TOTAL |
7,430 |
4,327 |
Following the July 2010 Cabinet meeting a series of proposals have been developed that will achieve the targeted savings for each of the first three years with a contribution to the fourth year. Attached at Appendix B to the report of Management Team is a summary, by portfolio, of the value of the savings proposals in each year.
If the budget is set in March 2011 with a Council Tax freeze
and the associated four year grant there will be an increase in the budget
pressure in year five. This is set out above in paragraph 1.8.1.4 and the
consequence is included in the financial projection at Appendix A to the report
of Management Team. At this time it would be prudent for the Council to
recognise this additional pressure and to identify actions to mitigate the
additional pressure in advance of the end of the four year grant.
At this stage the proposals are being developed and, where
they include organisational change in 2011/12, staff consultation has begun or
will begin in January 2011. At this time proposals are not fully developed to
provide specific details.
One major proposal included in the summary at Appendix B to
the report of Management Team relates to the method of contribution to the back
funding element of the pension fund. In the past the Council has contributed
through a percentage on-cost to the contribution by employees. This could
continue for the next three years at a rate based upon predicted employment
levels over that period. Alternatively a lump sum payment can be agreed for
each of the three years as follows:-
|
|
£,000 |
|
2011/12 |
1,206 |
|
2012/13 |
1,260 |
|
2013/14 |
1,325 |
The summary given at Appendix B to the report of Management
Team assumes that the option to pay an annual lump sum as detailed in the table
above is agreed. This option produces an annual saving of £0.2m to the Council
whilst removing the risk to the fund value from setting the on-cost percentage
too low or too high.
Each of the proposals that make up the four year savings target has been risk rated and a monitoring process has been developed within the Council’s performance management system “Covalent” in order to provide Cabinet and Management Team with detailed progress reports.
Capital Programme
The current Capital Programme 2010/11 to 2012/13 was approved by Council in March 2010 and subsequently amended by Cabinet in response to monitoring reports provided during the year.
As stated above a number of approved changes have occurred
during the year. In addition, in preparation for this report, the schemes in
the current programme have been reviewed to identify where budgets could be
reduced. During this time no new schemes have been proposed for inclusion and a
number of current schemes have been identified as requiring a reduced budget.
The changes identified through this review have been made and a proposed
programme for the period 2010/11 to 2014/15 is attached at Appendix C to the
report of Management Team.
The 2010/11 programme is fully funded from resources
currently held or from grant commitments. The 2011/12 programme can be fully
funded from the currently approved asset sales with a small balance being
carried forward to 2012/13. Resources to complete the 2012/13 programme do not
currently meet need. A balance of £2.4m is required from further asset sales,
grants and contributions or prudential borrowing. This level of prudential
borrowing is within the limit approved by Council in March 2010.
The extension to the programme for future years, by the continuation of ongoing schemes at their 2012/13 levels, would require identification of additional resources or further borrowing of £1.8m per annum. It should be noted that borrowing at this level would mean exceeding the current prudential limit, would place increased pressure on the strategic projection and require the approval of Council.
In accordance with the current MTFS policy, inclusion of a scheme in the programme does not confirm the ability to commence the scheme or permission to incur expenditure unless resources to finance the scheme exist and have been prioritised to that scheme. Cabinet will be required to consider the commencement of individual schemes as future resources become available to the Council.
Further opportunities for funding will continue to be explored and identified. It should be noted that a final recommendation on the Capital Programme 2011/12 to 2014/15 is not required until the February 2011 cabinet meeting. The draft programme is however required for the consultation with Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
Review of Balances
The MTFS has, in the past, envisaged that the Council will
maintain a minimum level of revenue balances of £2m and that Cabinet will set
working balances at 10% of net revenue expenditure.
Based on the current strategic projection this would set a working balance close to or below the minimum level set by Council. It may be appropriate this year to consider the level of both. The table below shows the value of 10% of net revenue expenditure for the four years of the spending review period. It also considers the percentage level of working balance that Cabinet’s current level of £2.3m would represent of the revised net revenue expenditure (NRE):
|
Year |
Net Revenue Expenditure £,000 |
10% Balance £,000 |
Current balance as % NRE |
|
2011/12 |
20,210 |
2,021 |
11.4 |
|
2012/13 |
19,863 |
1,986 |
11.6 |
|
2013/14 |
20,208 |
2,021 |
11.4 |
|
2014/15 |
20,202 |
2,020 |
11.4 |
At this time there is a significant level of unallocated
balances available to the Council; there also remains significant uncertainty
in terms of the economic environment. It is therefore recommended that the
Council takes a prudent approach and maintains a minimum working balance at a
cash value of £2.3m and reviews the position regularly taking into account
strategic risk and the level of unallocated balances.
Cabinet have recently considered a report on the work of the Carbon Reduction Working Party. This group is developing proposals that will enable the Council to achieve reductions in carbon emissions and achieve long term reductions in energy costs. In order to achieve the necessary changes some schemes require up front investment. It is proposed to allocate resources from within balances to provide funding for an invest to save arrangement to achieve these carbon reduction proposals. At this time costs totalling £55,000 have been identified which all have longer term payback periods than the current invest to save payback period of 5 years. A detailed carbon reduction plan and programme of work is scheduled for presentation to Cabinet in March 2011.
In response to the Government’s localism agenda it is proposed to develop the Council’s role as an enabler of localism related activity through a fund of £0.1m that could be set aside from balances. The fund could enable the borough’s community based groups and residents to deliver the Council’s priorities and achieve efficiencies and improved outcomes. The purpose and use of the fund would be developed through discussion and engagement with Councillors, businesses and voluntary and community groups, which is planned to commence in January 2011, and could include facilitating the establishment of new community based initiatives and social enterprises through direct support and levering funds from other sources including the government and national lottery.
Attached at Appendix D to the report of Management Team is a
summary of the current level of balances including a projection to 31 March
2011. Also shown are the proposals for the use of balances outlined elsewhere
in this report. As at 31 March 2011 balances are predicted to be £5.8m of which
£2.3m is held as minimum working balance, a further £0.9m is unallocated
general balances and £2m is available from the VAT reclaim. After incorporation
of all uses proposed in this report balances will total £4.8m and including the
VAT reclaim £1.9m of this will remain unallocated.
Budget Consultation
In August 2010, Cabinet considered a report on options for budget consultation for 2011/12 onwards. Cabinet approved a consultation in line with the programme set out below:
A minimum twelve week consultation to:
· Raise awareness of the budget situation, the statutory services the Council provides, and the savings options considered by Cabinet;
· To find out which discretionary services matter most to local people;
· To encourage comments on the service options considered by Cabinet; and
· To ask for other suggestions for savings.
A road show, website pages and a consultation leaflet was designed with the theme of “MY Council, what matters to ME” to focus the consultation on the issues that matter most to Maidstone people.
The main activity at each road show was designed to encourage respondents to indicate which discretionary areas of service matter most to them. Respondents were given a choice of eight discretionary services and asked to indicate up to four which matter most to them.
The eight discretionary areas were:
· Community Services – community safety, CCTV and community development
· Democratic Representation – civic occasions and events
· Environmental Protection – health promotion and toilets
· Transport Services – bus shelters and rural bus services
· Recreation & Sport – Maidstone Leisure Centre, sports and youth activities
· Open spaces, parks and recreation grounds
· Grants to voluntary and charitable organisations
· Tourism, visitor information centre, town centre management, conference venue marketing and Christmas light
Officers and Members of the Cabinet took the road show to 12 public events at locations such as Tesco Grove Green supermarket, Maidstone Leisure Centre, Staplehurst Library, Yalding Farmers Market and Maidstone Gateway. The events were a mix of rural and urban locations. In all 1,829 respondents completed the discretionary services activity.
In addition to this activity, the road show was taken to the four neighbourhood forums, the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) meeting, the Older Person’s Forum and the Voluntary and Community Sector focus group. In addition, at the rural conference, where a briefing on the budget strategy was given, the leaflet was handed to all attendees.
Council staff were consulted through the Staff Forum and at a series of listening days. A briefing was given at the rural conference and delegates were given the explanatory leaflet.
The notes of the neighbourhood forum meetings are set out in Appendix E to the report of Management Team.
More than 50 people completed the consultation leaflet or web form. A full list of the comments is set out in Appendix F to the report of Management Team.
These comments show that there is a consensus of opinion on a number of issues including the need to maximise efficiency through savings on consumables such as paper, envelopes and postage, using buying consortiums and reducing office and buildings costs such as heating and lighting and opening hours.
There is support, particularly at the Neighbourhood Forums, for more partnerships working and outsourcing work and a suggestion that powers and services could be devolved to parish councils to save money.
A number of people have written about concurrent functions with comments about fairness.
Several consultees encouraged the Council to consider raising more income from services. Suggestions include planning, parking, waste collection, planning enforcement, charging entry at the museum, and charging for bus passes.
Democratic services were mentioned at the Neighbourhood Forums and by other consultees. Suggestions included saving money on elections costs, reducing the number of councillors and going to four yearly elections. This area was ranked the least important discretionary area by consultees.
Grants were the second least important area for consultees but there was an acknowledgement in the comments of the part played by the voluntary sector now and in future.
Capital spending was mentioned by some with suggestions that the programme
should be rescheduled or the High Street Regeneration programme or Museum East
Wing project cut or reduced.
Officer and Councillor remuneration and expenses were mentioned by several consultees suggesting savings in salaries and pension costs.
There were several comments in support of the cabinet’s initial thoughts on savings and efficiencies. These included “Cabinet’s proposals to return people to work are a real step in the right direction”. “Focus on central services is the right focus”. “Savings should be focused around lean processes of shared services and procurement”.
The comments and opinions are detailed in the appendices however the key issues that require further review are detailed below:
· Areas requiring more consideration:
o Joint Working, including procurement;
o Central service reductions;
o Staff and Member direct cost reductions.
· New areas for focus:
o Office Accommodation;
o Cost of democracy; and
o Income generation.
· Areas of conflicting public opinion:
o Reductions in grant aid;
o Extent of outsourcing; and
o Extent of localism.
In addition to these issues, the table highlights the result of the survey into discretionary services that matter most to the residents of the borough. This table is reproduced in the order of importance according to the result:
|
Service Area |
Description |
% of Vote |
|
Open Spaces |
Parks & open spaces |
20 |
|
Community Services |
Community Safety, Community Development & CCTV |
19 |
|
Transport Services |
Support for socially desirable buses & Bus shelter maintenance |
16 |
|
Recreation & Sport |
Leisure Centre, youth & sport provision |
13 |
|
Environmental Protection |
Public conveniences and health promotion |
12 |
|
Visitor Economy |
Tourism and visitor information centre |
10 |
|
Grants |
Grant aid |
9 |
|
Democratic Representation |
Town Hall and civic events |
1 |
This result is represented below as a pie chart for ease of comparison:
It should be noted that the number of issues identified through the consultation for further consideration is low. The vast majority of opinion and commentary supports the actions already taken by Cabinet or recommended in this report.
Additional areas for consideration include further efficiency in the use of office space, the cost of democracy and the opportunities for enhancing income generation. Further work on these issues will be undertaken to identify opportunities for savings.
Links to the Strategic Plan
The review of the Strategic Plan in preparation for 2011/12 onwards is presented to Cabinet elsewhere on this agenda. This draft Strategic Plan provides greater simplicity and focus on the priorities of the Council.
The review has been progressed jointly by the Policy & Performance Team and Corporate Finance. The purpose of the co-ordinated approach was to ensure appropriate links between the Strategic Plan and the MTFS.
An updated draft of the MTFS is attached at Appendix G to the report of Management Team and is, in essence, the formal statement of the objectives outlined in this budget strategy report. The final document will be published as an integral part of the budget and will therefore be directly linked to the final approved versions of the strategic projection at Appendix A, the savings proposals at Appendix B and the capital programme at Appendix C of the report of Management Team.
The MTFS has been enhanced by the inclusion of a full risk analysis and it is intended that, along with consultation with Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny, this risk analysis will form the focus of additional consultation this year with the Audit Committee in relation to its impact on strategic risk and governance. The risk analysis is separately attached at Appendix G to the report of Management Team.
Alternatives considered and why rejected
A number of alternative assumptions are included in the report and appendices for Cabinet’s consideration.
The production of the budget for 2011/12 is an element of the statutory process of calculating the Council Tax for 2011/12. In addition the completed and approved document is required to be robust and adequate under the Local Government Act 2003. A statement to this effect must be given by the Chief Financial Officer. On this basis the actions outlined in the report of Management Team were considered.
Background Papers
Consultation from the Department for Communities and Local Government on Revenue Grant Settlement 2011/12
|
Should you be concerned about this decision and wish to call it in, please submit a call in form signed by any two Non-Executive Members to the Head of Change and Scrutiny by: 5 January 2011 |