(Councillors Ashworth and Kerr having both previously declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the following item as members of Morecambe Town Council left the meeting prior to consideration of this item.)
In accordance with Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the Chairman agreed to consider the report as an item of urgent business to enable officers to know at an early stage the money available for next year’s festivals and events.
The Head of Community Engagement presented a report to inform Cabinet of the outcome of the review of 2010 festivals and to bring forward proposals for the 2011 Festivals and Events Programme within the framework of the medium term financial strategy and Corporate Plan objectives.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option and comments, were set out in the report as follows:-
|
Option 1: To commit funding now to allow progress towards festivals and events for 2011 - 2012. |
Option 2: To delay any decision until budget council in March 2011. |
Option 3; To reduce funding in light of the current budgetary position facing the Council. |
|
Advantages |
|
|
|
Enables council to work with partners to develop a co-ordinated plan towards event delivery for 2011, take advantage of major regional, national and international events and explore sponsorship opportunities |
Council is able to make decision as part of wider budget setting context. |
Makes a contribution towards the savings targets required by Council following on from the recent Comprehensive Spending Review. |
|
Opportunity to develop a joined up marketing plan for visitors and local people (reducing the plethora of separate marketing approaches and ensuring no event clashes.)
|
|
|
|
Disadvantages |
|
|
|
Decision taken ahead of wider budget setting context. |
Prevents the council working with partners to develop a co-ordinated plan towards event delivery for 2011 and risks an uncoordinated and less effective series of events. |
Uncertainty amongst businesses and the media, leading to potential damaging publicity not just locally but further afield. |
|
Less likely to achieve sponsorship and therefore income towards 2011 events. |
|
|
|
Uncertainty amongst businesses and the media, leading to potential damaging publicity not just locally but further afield. |
|
|
There was no officer preferred option.
Councillor Langhorn proposed, seconded by Councillor Robinson:
“(1) That Cabinet notes the review of 2010 festivals and events.
(2) That Cabinet agrees in principle to the 2011 Events Programme but request further work be undertaken on the funding of those festivals, in particular to maximise income to those festivals and events.
(3) That Cabinet supports in principle the merging of these budgets to provide greater flexibility and as a means to reduce costs.
(4) That the Revenue Budget and budget projection be updated.”
By way of an amendment it was proposed by Councillor Barry and seconded by Councillor Fletcher:
“That the sum allocated to the festivals and events budget be reduced to £35K at this stage.”
Councillors then voted on the amendment.
2 Members voted in favour of the amendment (Councillors Barry and Fletcher) and 4 Members against (Councillors Blamire, Bryning, Langhorn and Robinson), whereupon the Chairman declared the amendment to be lost.
Councillors then voted on the original proposal.
Resolved:
(4 Members voted in favour (Councillors Blamire, Bryning, Langhorn and Robinson) and 2 Members abstained (Councillors Barry and Fletcher.)
(1) That Cabinet notes the review of 2010 festivals and events.
(2) That Cabinet agrees in principle to the 2011 Events Programme but request further work be undertaken on the funding of those festivals, in particular to maximise income to those festivals and events.
(3) That Cabinet supports in principle the merging of these budgets to provide greater flexibility and as a means to reduce costs.
(4) That the Revenue Budget and budget projection be updated.
Officers responsible for effecting the decision:
Head of Community Engagement
Head of Financial Services.
Reasons for making the decision:
The decision enables the Council to work with partners to develop a co-ordinated plan towards event delivery for 2011, and explore sponsorship opportunities as a means to reduce costs whilst the establishment of a general fund rather than specifically allocating funds to each core event will enable greater flexibility to support the objectives of festivals and events for the City Council.
(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Langhorn)
Cabinet received a report from the Head of Financial Services to provide an interim update on the Council’s strategic planning for finances and resources in context of the recent Government Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR).
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:
Council Tax Targets:
For 2011/12 it is considered likely that there is a relatively narrow band of options available to the Council regarding tax increases, from say 0% to 2.5%, assuming that it wishes to avoid any form of challenge. From the earlier consultation exercise on whether to introduce local referendum arrangements that could veto ‘excessive’ tax increases, it is clear that in one way or another, Government is prepared to tackle authorities that retain plans for higher tax rises.
That said, the outcome of that consultation is not yet known and therefore Government’s firm views on what level of increase may be deemed acceptable are not yet known.
There is a clear financial benefit in recommending a Council tax freeze; there is also a clear disincentive to increase council tax anywhere between just above 0% up to 2.5%.
The main risks attached to any option relate to the ability of the Council to take decisions on matching service levels with the money available to fund them. Furthermore there is a real risk that actual savings targets prove to be substantially different from those indicated. To help counter this to a degree, there will be further opportunities to review target increases during the forthcoming budget as more accurate information becomes available.
In terms of options, the impact on Council Tax payers is key and this is particularly so regarding the council tax freeze proposals. There will be reputational, operational and financial risks, opportunities and trade-offs attached to whichever option Cabinet chooses.
Officer Preferred Option and Comments
The decision regarding council tax targets is clearly a matter for Members but that said, both the Chief Executive and the s151 Officer consider it advisable for the Council to take advantage of Government’s proposals and aim for a Council Tax freeze for 2011/12, subject to no other conditions or changes arising in connection with the proposed scheme.
Regarding 2012/13 and beyond, both the Chief Executive and the s151 Officer would advise against planning for a general Council Tax increase outside of a range of say 0 to 2.5% at this time. In due course more information will become available to inform such target setting. It may well be the case that from 2013/14 specific changes to the council tax benefit scheme are to be financed through additional flexibilities on council tax and these would need to be considered at the appropriate time.
Whatever Council Tax targets are in place, Members need to have supporting plans in place to achieve a balanced budget.
Councillor Langhorn proposed, seconded by Councillor Kerr:-
“(1) That Cabinet notes the broad outcome of Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review and the indicative savings required in order to balance future years' budgets.
(2) That Cabinet recommends a Council Tax freeze for 2011/12 and target increases of between 0 – 2% for future years' at this stage, for referral on to Council.
(3) That Cabinet agrees to continue with the current priorities in the Corporate Plan with the following amendments:
(4) To request officers to bring forward proposals for generating further income from services.
(5) To request officers to bring forward proposals to reduce expenditure on services which do not meet the current priorities outlined above.”
By way of an amendment it was moved by Councillor Barry and accepted by the mover and seconder of the original proposal as a friendly amendment:
“That the words ‘and/or to meet these priorities more efficiently’ be added to the end of recommendation (5).
At this point Councillor Kerr requested that the meeting be adjourned briefly in order for him to seek clarification from officers. The meeting adjourned at 12.40 and reconvened at 12.45pm.
By way of a further amendment, which was not accepted as a friendly amendment, Councillor Kerr proposed and Councillor Robinson seconded:-
“That ‘and housing led regeneration’ be added to recommendation 3 – Economic Regeneration – Energy Coast and Visitor Economy.”
Councillors then voted on the further amendment:-
3 Members (Councillors Ashworth, Kerr and Robinson) voted in favour, 4 Members (Councillors Barry, Blamire, Fletcher and Langhorn) voted against and 1 Member (Councillor Bryning) abstained.
Members then voted on the original motion, as amended.
Resolved:
(7 Members (Councillors Ashworth, Barry, Blamire, Bryning, Fletcher, Kerr and Langhorn) voted in favour, 1 Member (Councillor Robinson) abstained.)
(1) That Cabinet notes the broad outcome of Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review and the indicative savings required in order to balance future years' budgets.
(2) That Cabinet recommends a Council Tax freeze for 2011/12 and target increases of between 0 – 2% for future years' at this stage, for referral on to Council.
(3) That Cabinet agrees to continue with the current priorities in the Corporate Plan with the following amendments:
(4) To request officers to bring forward proposals for generating further income from services.
(5) To request officers to bring forward proposals to reduce expenditure on services which do not meet the current priorities outlined above and/or to meet these priorities more efficiently.
Officer responsible for effecting the decision:
The Head of Financial Services
Reasons for making the decision:
It is expected that the CSR will result in the Council needing to make significantly more savings than was previously forecast and whilst the exact implications are not known, this scenario is similar to that being faced by other local authorities nationwide. The Council cannot expect to continue to deliver the same range and standard of services that it currently provides although clarity on certain aspects of Council tax helps to a degree with planning. It is expected to be early December before reasonably accurate budget forecasts can be produced, in the interim the Council would be able to focus on how to tackle the financial challenges ahead, including reviewing its priorities and key strategies and objectives, to fit with what will be affordable.