Agenda item

OSDM.3/17    

Members considered a report that asked for consideration of the draft Budget proposals for 2018-19.

 

In introducing this agenda item, the Chairman highlighted the need for the Meeting to focus on making recommendations to the Executive on how the Council should close the projected Budget gap of £345,688.

 

In discussion, reference was made to:-

 

(a)    the Business Rate Pilot status funding.  Members requested receipt of information outlining the terms of the bid and what was being proposed within these terms;

 

(b)    the unfairness of the Central Government funding provision.  In expressing his deep frustrations at the unfairness in the Council’s Settlement Funding Assessment, a Member PROPOSED the following motion:-

 

‘That the unfairness of Central Government Funding for Shire District Councils be brought to the attention of our local MPs, with them both being encouraged to ask a parliamentary question on this point during the weekly Prime Ministers Question Time.’

 

This proposal was subsequently SECONDED and when being put to the vote was declared CARRIED.               

 

(c)    the proposal to install Beach Huts.  For future 2018/19 draft Budget Setting reports, it was agreed that reference within the title to ‘North and South Sands’ should be deleted;

 

(d)    any public conveniences transfer to a local town/parish council.  A Member asked that it be recognised that town and larger parish councils often had greater capacity and resilience to be able to take on such additional responsibilities.  In response, these disparities were acknowledged and assurances were given that, if approved, time had been built into the Programme to enable for a detailed consultation exercise to be undertaken before any savings would be realised.

 

Specifically regarding those public conveniences highlighted in the presented agenda report at South Milton, the view was expressed that the National Trust (who generated significant income in this particular location) should take on responsibility for providing these facilities.  Officers responded by giving an assurance that all interested third parties would be contacted as part of the consultation process in this regard;

 

(e)  the proposal to cease accepting cash and cheques at Council premises (excluding Car Parks).  A lengthy discussion on this proposal ensued during which a number of Members expressed their concern that this would have a particular impact on elderly residents.  Also, whilst reference was made to the ability to pay via Paypoint or the Post Office, this view was countered by some Members stating that villages such as South Brent no longer had a high street bank or Post Office facility.

 

At this point, the Chairman invited a show of hands on how many Members did not support the proposal to cease accepting cash and cheques at Council premises.  In so doing, exactly half (9 of the 18 Members in attendance) were unsupportive of this proposal.

 

To reflect the general sense amongst the meeting, the Chairman proceeded to invite a show of hands on a proposal to discontinue accepting cash and cheques at Council premises (excluding Car Parks), whilst still retaining a postal service (for receipt of cheques) at Follaton House.  In so doing, 13 of the 18 Members in attendance supported this proposal in principle.

 

(f)   partnership grant funding to the CVS.  Some reservations were expressed over the impact of the proposed £20,000 reduction to the CVS and the following motion was PROPOSED and SECONDED:

 

‘That the partnership funding given to the CVS should be reduced by £10,000 for 2018/19.’

 

In discussion, it was noted that the Council had delegated a Task and Finish Group to undertake a review into future partnership grant funding on its behalf and the proposed £20,000 reduction reflected its final recommendations.  As a consequence, some Members questioned the merits of commissioning such a review if colleagues were not then willing to support its recommendations.  Furthermore, officers confirmed that CVS representatives had been made aware of the Group recommendation and were already looking at revising their working arrangements to generate efficiencies.

 

When put to the vote, this motion was declared LOST, with the majority of Members supportive of the proposed £20,000 reduction;

 

(g)    a paper tabled by Cllr Pennington.  At the discretion of the Chairman, Cllr Pennington tabled (and spoke to) a paper that he had produced that re-presented a number of potential additional savings that had not been included in the draft budget setting proposals presented at the Executive meeting on 7 December 2017 (Minute E.45/17 refers).

 

Having each been PROPOSED and SECONDED for re-inclusion in the Budget setting process, a debate ensued on each of the following proposals:

 

-        Charging for Food Advice: Following some soft market testing, officers informed that the anticipated £5,000 saving would not be achievable.  As a result, the meeting did not support this proposal;

-        Complete Waste Commissioning process by April 2019: Since the procurement process would not be completed until the end of the 2018/19 Financial Year, it was acknowledged that it would be inappropriate to support this saving at this time and the meeting did not support this proposal;

-        Review offering sand bags free of charge:  The meeting was of the view that additional work was required on this proposal and it was therefore not supported at this current time;

-      Cancel South West Councils Annual Subscription: Subject to clarity being sought over a potential significant redundancy liability, the meeting was supportive of this proposal;

-      Third Party Meeting Concessions: Having been informed that this proposal had already been built into the identified savings, the meeting was supportive of this proposal;

-        Cease Community Re-investment Project:  Some Members highlighted the significant ongoing budget gap that the Council had to fill and it was PROPOSED and SECONDED that:

 

‘The total fund (amounting to £154,000) be removed from the Budget’

 

In support of the motion, some Members highlighted that Section 106 monies could be used for similar purposes to this Fund and, without any capping limitations, town and parish councils did have the ability to increase their precepts to support local projects.  In contrast, other Members were of the view that often smaller parishes were very reliant on this Fund as their only means of providing any infrastructure.  In addition, a Member stated that the Fund had been primarily established to reflect the additional costs arising from new homes being developed.

 

When put to the vote, this proposal was declared LOST.

 

An alternative motion was then PROPOSED and SECONDED as follows:

 

‘That the fund be reduced to £75,000 for 2018/19.’

 

In discussion, a number of Members felt that this proposal was a fair compromise and when put to the vote it was declared CARRIED.

 

-         Complete Waste Commissioning process by April 2019.  Since the process would not be completed until the end of the 2018/19 Financial Year, it was acknowledged that it would be inappropriate to support this saving at this time and the meeting did not support this proposal;

-        Cease funding for Partnership Manager Position at the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP).  The meeting was supportive of this proposal;

-        Cease funding for South Devon Green Infrastructure Partnership.  Members were advised that the Partnership may have already ceased.  However, in the event of it still bring an active Partnership, the meeting was supportive of this proposal;

-        Cease funding for a Reserve Partnership.  The meeting was supportive of the principle of this proposal, subject to further information being obtained; and 

-        Charging for Food Hygiene Rating Scheme Revisits: Having been informed that this proposal had already been built into the identified savings, the meeting was supportive of this proposal.

 

(h)    the Business Rates Pilot status for 2018/19.  To reflect the fact that the Council would have received a pooling gain (in the region of £100,000), it was PROPOSED and SECONDED and when put to the vote declared CARRIED that:

 

“£100,000 from extra Business Rates be used towards closing the 2018/19 Budget gap.”

 

With regard to the remaining monies to be received, the overwhelming majority of Members wished for this to be invested in the South Hams, with the intention of providing an ongoing income stream;

 

(i)      the unallocated 2017/18 New Homes Bonus Funding.  It was PROPOSED and SECONDED and when put to the vote declared CARRIED that:

 

“The £93,784 remaining unallocated New Homes Bonus funding be used towards closing the 2018/19 Budget gap.”

 

In addition to this recommendation, it was also PROPOSED and SECONDED and when put to the vote declared CARRIED that:

 

“£500,000 of New Homes Bonus Funding is used to balance the 2018/19 Revenue Budget.”

 

(j)      impact upon the base Budget.  The Section 151 Officer felt it worthwhile to highlight to the meeting that a number of the significant savings that had been recommended by the meeting to date were one-off (and not recurring) sums.  As a result, it was noted that Members would be faced with similarly difficult decisions next year in order to bridge the anticipated 2019/20 Budget gap;

 

(k)    a proposed increase in Council Tax for 2018/19 of £5 per Band D household.  Whilst again regrettable, the meeting was of the view that it had no choice other than to increase Council Tax for 2018/19 by £5 per Band D household and a motion was PROPOSED and SECONDED and when put to the vote declared CARRIED to that effect;

 

(l)      the 2018/19 Capital Programme Budget Proposals for 201819.  It was PROPOSED and SECONDED and when put to the vote declared CARRIED that:

 

“The 2018/19 Capital Programme Budget Proposals be approved and financed in accordance with paragraph 8.2 of the presented agenda report.”

It was then:

 

RECOMMENDED

 

That the Executive RECOMMEND to Council that:-