Issue - meetings

Report of the Cabinet Member Finance & Community Development and the Director of Resources

The following is the recommended process to be followed for the debate relating to the Council’s Budget for 2012 – 2013, (Agenda item 11). The rules of procedure shall be varied accordingly for this item only.

1.         The Mayor to propose suspension of the following rules of debate:

-           That the time limit on speeches is relaxed with regard to the following speeches:-

§         Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development, (F), when moving the motion to adopt the budget being proposed by the Cabinet (“the Cabinet’s budget”), Stage 2(i).

§         Group Leaders when making Budget Statement on behalf of group, Stage 3(i) – (ii).

-           To permit the Cabinet Member F and Group leaders to speak more than once in the debate, (in addition to any right of reply etc), for the purpose of putting and answering questions at Stage 2(iii).

2.         Budget Statement and moving of motion

(i)         The Cabinet Member F shall deliver the budget statement and formally move the resolutions set out in paragraph 1.2 of the report of the Cabinet Member Finance. (N.B. Not time limited)

(ii)        The seconder shall formally second the motion. (N.B. The seconder may reserve their speech until later in the debate prior to the closing speeches) 5 minute limit applies.

(iii)       Members may then ask questions of the Cabinet Member F (who may refer them to the Chief Finance Officer when appropriate), on matters relating to agenda item 13. (N.B. members are limited to one question only, without supplementary, and the Cabinet Member F shall wait until all questions have been put before responding).

3.         Statements by Group Leaders

(i)         Statement on behalf of the Conservative Group including tabling but not moving, any proposed amendment to the Cabinet’s budget. (no time limit)

(ii)        Statement on behalf of the People Against Bureaucracy Group including tabling, but not moving, any proposed amendment to the Cabinet’s budget. (No time limit).

4.         Formal moving, Seconding, debating, discussion and voting on any amendments tabled in the following order:

            - People Against Bureaucracy Group

            - Conservative Group

N.B. 

§         The Cabinet Member F has the right to a speech in reply at the end of the debate on any amendment. (10 mins).

§         The mover of an amendment may speak to move the amendment, (10 mins), and also has the right of reply to the debate immediately before the speech of the Cabinet Member F. (10 mins).

§         Amendments carried will become part of the substantive motion going forward. Once all proposed amendments have been debated and put to the vote the final version of the motion shall go forward to the next stage.

5.         Consideration of Amendments

(a)       If the Cabinet’s budget has not been amended, the Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development to formally propose the budget (no speech), and the final proposal will be debated and voted upon subject to the Cabinet Member F's right of reply (10 mins).

(b)  ...  view the full agenda text for item 11

The Mayor invited the Section 151 Officer to give a presentation to Council on the budget.

In response to questions from members, the Section 151 Officer gave the following responses;

• Regarding the freeze of council tax, the government grant would be equivalent to a 2.5% increase in council tax.
• Asked whether the council's levels of reserves were consistent with other councils comparable with Cheltenham, he advised that in setting reserves the council took a similar view to the advice from CIPFA that the reserves should be set at around 3% of the gross budget.
• He informed members that the savings from shared services amounted to an excess of £2 million over five years broken down as follows:
  One Legal - £80 K per annum p.a.
  Building Control - £30 K p.a.
  Audit Partnerhsip - £30 K p.a.
  GO - £270 K p.a. from 2013/14
• Regarding the timing of payments from Glitnir, Icelandic Bank he advised that discussions were currently underway with the winding up board and they were expecting a payment by the end of this financial year. However even if this payment was delayed, it was a matter of timing but the payment itself was not in question.

The Mayor, to facilitate the presentation of the Budget, proposed suspension of certain rules of debate, namely:-

That the time limit on speeches is relaxed with regard to the following speeches

• Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development when moving the motion to adopt the budget being proposed by the Cabinet.

• Group leaders or Group spokesperson when making budget statements on behalf of their group.

The Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development and Group Leaders could also speak more than once in the debate (in addition to any rights of reply etc) for the purpose of putting and answering questions. 

This was agreed by Council.

The Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development introduced the 2012/13 budget proposals with a detailed speech (please see attached).  

The Cabinet Member Finance moved acceptance of the 2012/13 Budget as set out in the report.  The motion was seconded by Councillor Rawson who reserved his right to speak.

In response to questions from members, the Cabinet Member Finance gave the following responses:

• A member raised concerns about the extension of car parking charges to 8 p.m. in the evening and wanted to know whether this was cost effective. Another member had concerns about the number of shops closing in the town and whether this was linked with car parking charges. The Cabinet Member advised that this was currently being reviewed and a report would be produced. He had been advised by the Town Centre Manager that footfall in the town was fairly consistent with previous years and therefore he was not convinced that higher car parking charges was the reason behind shops closing down in the town centre.  In his view the concessionary travel scheme was a more likely cause of the fall in car parking income. The county council had extended their on street car  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11

Joint report of the Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development and the Director of Resources

RESOLVED that it be recommended to Council that;

1. The revised budget for 2011/12 be noted;

2. The final budget proposals including a proposed council tax for the services provided by Cheltenham Borough Council of £187.12 for the year 2012/13 (a 0% increase based on a Band D property) be approved.

3. The growth proposals, including one off initiatives at Appendix 3 be approved.

4. The savings / additional income at Appendix 4 be approved.

5. The reserve re-alignments at Appendix 5, as outlined in section 9 be approved.

6. The proposed capital programme at Appendix 6, as outlined in Section 10 be approved.

7. The updated Medium Term Financial Strategy at Appendix 7 including the impact of the ‘bridging the gap’ programme on the forecast budget gap be noted.

8. The proposed Property Maintenance programme at Appendix 8, as outlined in Section 11 be approved.

9. A level of supplementary estimate of £100,000 for 2011/12 as outlined in section 14 be approved.

Cabinet Member Finance & Community Development highlighted a minor amendment, the deletion of the word ‘consultation’ from the Executive Summary in the report as the consultation had been concluded.  There had not been a large number of responses and he considered that this was due, in part, to the Council Tax freeze and the fact that no substantial cuts were being proposed.  Responses had included questions around why the Governments council tax freeze grant had been accepted.  Consideration had been given to not accepting this grant, but the difference between a 2.5% increase and a 3.5% increase to Council Tax equated to only £80k and a referendum triggered by an increase above 3.5% would cost more than £80k.  Other concerns raised during the consultation related to the proposal to build £250k of the New Homes Bonus (NHB) into the 2012/13 base budget.  It was important to note that the NHB had been based on previous levels, the funding was not ring-fenced and all authorities across Gloucestershire, including the County Council, had done this as a result of current circumstances.  Green Waste had also been a common area of concern and he suggested that a working group should consider the matter further. 

As a direct result of the consultation, the following changes had been made.  In response to a number of concerns, there would be a one off transitional support payment of £5k to the Arts Council.  The Citizens Advice Bureau had lost the Single Advice Contract in October 2011 and as a consequence this threatened its future in Cheltenham.  In acknowledgement of the wide ranging advice offered by the Citizens Advice Bureau, in times when more people sought such advice, it was agreed that two £30k payments of transitional support would be made, but this would be subject to development of a suitable business case.

Cabinet Member Built Environment felt that the 2012/13 budget was an interesting one.  On the face of it the proposals were inoffensive, a Council Tax freeze, a freeze on off road parking charges, etc, but it was in fact the result of a large number of efficiency savings and it should be considered a success story.  As Members were aware, there would be no grant from the Government next year and it would be an effort to keep Council Tax down, but Members acknowledged that people were struggling and therefore efforts would be doubled.  He expressed his disappointment that over the last 2 years the County Council had chosen to increase the cost of resident permits by 29% and business parking charges by 140%.

Planned maintenance had been a cause for concern for the Environment Overview & Scrutiny Committee and he was hopeful that Members would be reassured upon seeing the programme for next year, with a budget of £1,000,050, which compared favourably to a time before the national financial crisis.  He felt strongly that maintenance and reinvestment into Council assets was crucial and importantly, what the public expected.

Cabinet Member Corporate Services felt the approach to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7