Nadine Muschamp, Chief Officer (Resources), will provide a presentation on Lancaster City Council’s Budget and Policy Framework Proposals for 2014/15.
More information on Cabinet's specific proposals will only be available following Cabinet on 21 January 2014.
Copies of the presentation will be made available at the meeting.
Minutes:
The panel received a presentation from the Chief Officer (Resources) regarding the Cabinet’s Budget and Policy Framework Proposals for 2014/15. The Leader of Lancaster City Council, and the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Finance were in attendance at the meeting to answer members’ questions.
The Chief Officer (Resources) outlined the council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy to the panel, this was to:
It was advised that as of late summer 2013, the projected budget savings for future years had increased as follows:
It was also expected that there would be further funding reductions in subsequent years.
The city council’s proposed future direction was outlined; it was proposed that the existing corporate priorities would be redefined in order to give a narrower focus. It was also proposed that the council adopt the “Ensuring Council” as its ethos for delivering future corporate plans. The main principals of an Ensuring Council’s ethos was outlined in detail as follows:
The Chief Officer (Resources) advised of the progress towards required savings which had been achieved so far. Approximately £800,000 per year had been saved through efficiency savings and ‘trimming of services’, with £600,000 a year achieved through income generation and improved forecasts. So far major service reductions had been avoided, but it was not known for how long this would be maintained.
Growth proposals for consideration were outlined to the group, and covered the following areas:
· Police Community Support Officers
· Bold Street Housing Site Development
· Charging Policy for Waste Bins and Boxes.
There were two additional expected growth proposals; Morecambe Area Action Plan, and ICT.
The Cabinet’s budget proposals were outlined to the panel, and included the following:
· To keep council tax increases at 2% year on year, subject to local referendum thresholds
· To continue with service reviews (a schedule for individual service reviews was circulated to the panel)
· In principle, to look to use surplus balances to maintain services to the public for a limited period.
The Chief Officer (Resources) invited questions and comments from those present, topics covered included the following:
The panel queried the running costs of Lancaster and Morecambe Town Halls. It was agreed that this information be circulated to members of the panel when available. Members asked questions regarding commercial properties owned by the council, it was advised that all council owned commercial property was currently under review, and officers advised as to the current position regarding St Leonard’s House, Lancaster.
Members queried the monetary impact to the city council regarding the extension to the scheme offering rate relief to small businesses. It was advised that Government had confirmed that it would meet in full the business rate changes that had been announced in the Autumn Statement.
The panel discussed the proposed increase in council tax. Members were reminded that under the Localism Act, if an authority’s council tax increase exceeded the principles set by the Secretary of State, then it must hold a local referendum. It is still assumed that a 2% threshold would apply, although a Government announcement was awaited. The panel then discussed Cabinet’s proposals in detail.
The chairman invited proposals from panel members.
It was proposed by Councillor Mace:
“That the various comments regarding proposed reductions to bus services in the district be formalised and provided to Lancashire County Council, and that the County Council be requested to reconsider reductions in subsidies to bus services.”
The chairman advised that as the issue of bus services was not included within the city council’s budget proposals the proposition was inappropriate to be considered at this point in the meeting. It was advised that Councillor Mace could, if he so wished, submit his own response to Lancashire County Council.
It was proposed by Councillor Newman-Thompson and seconded by Councillor Hall:
“That the report be noted and that the Chief Officer (Resources) and Cabinet be thanked for the work undertaken so far.”
Upon being put to the vote 4 members voted in favour of the proposition, with 2 abstentions, whereupon the chairman declared the proposition to be carried.
Resolved:
That the report be noted and that the Chief Officer (Resources) and Cabinet be thanked for the work undertaken so far.