Agenda item

Report of the Director - Finance and Corporate Services

The Senior Finance Business Partner presented the Q1 position for the Council’s financial and performance monitoring for 2024/25.

The Senior Finance Business Partner said that there was currently a projected underspend in both revenue and capital which were proposed to be earmarked for additional cost pressures. She referred to the variances set out in Table 1 of the report, notably favourable variances due to interest on income, additional funding and grants, and business rates. She also noted the most significant adverse variant arising from planning, due to appeals and enforcement. She explained that the Council did have a reserve fund for planning variances but that as there were in year efficiencies it would be covered through those.

The Senior Finance Business Partner referred to Table 2 for the earmarked proposed uses for the underspend.

In relation to the capital programme, the Senior Finance Business Partner said that the Council proposed to rephase £3.756 of the underspend to 2025/26 as summarised in Table 3. She said that the remaining underspend was mainly due to £1m allocated for the travellers site acquisition which would potentially be removed later in the year as no sites had been identified, and underspends on Rushcliffe Oaks Crematorium and Bingham Arena, where funds had been allocated for possible VAT liability and post opening enhancements, but which could potentially be released later in the year.

The Senior Finance Business Partner informed the Group that the Council did not have any external borrowing and was in a healthy financial position, but that this could change. Over the longer term, she noted that capital resources were diminishing and that the Council had big environmental objectives which needed to be met.

The Chairman said that she thought the Council’s underspends and efficiencies to be good given the recent fluctuations in interest and inflation rates.

The Vice Chair of Communities referred to the efficiencies from staff positions not being filled and the Senior Finance Business Partner explained that the majority of these had occurred where there had been changeover of staff and a period of time between the outgoing staff member leaving and the new employee starting. She said that there were also some posts which the Council did not plan to fill.

In relation to Table 2, the Vice Chair of Communities referred to the underspend from West Bridgford Town Centre regeneration and pedestrianisation of Central Avenue and the Senior Finance Business Partner said that this project was on the Council’s radar and so it was holding the funds as potential.

The Vice Chair of Communities referred to Table 3 and asked why projects weren’t being taken forward if the money was available and the Chair of Growth and Development Scrutiny Group echoed this sentiment. The Senior Finance Business Partner referred to Appendix D which provided more information on the capital programme. In relation to Hound Lodge, she said that the Council was waiting for a review of the facility to be completed before undertaking any works and in relation the West Park Kiosk, she explained that the Council was waiting on building regulations and would need to tender for the works and that there were various aspects that needed to be place before work could take place. She said that the Council sought to set out realistic timeframes for completion of works.

The Chair of Growth and Development Scrutiny Group asked whether a sentence could be added to the report explaining why projects were being carried forward and the Senior Finance Business Partner said that she would take this back for review.

The Vice Chair of Communities asked about the Transformation Plan being achieved in one quarter and the Senior Finance Business Partner explained that this target was for Q1 rather than for the full year.

The Chair of Growth and Development Scrutiny Group asked about registered housing providers and the Senior Finance Business Partner said that there was a national shortage of land available and a shortage of developers calling on this funding as there were other pots of money that they could access more easily. The Service Manager for Corporate Services added that developers found it more difficult to sell the affordable housing and so were not motivated to build them. She said that it was matter of supply and demand and that the Council did not control the mechanisms.

The Chair of Governance asked about Edwalton Golf Course showing a loss and whether this reflected a post pandemic fall off in usage or a longer term problem. The Senior Finance Business Partner said that the Golf Course had experienced problems linked to flooding but that the position may recover. She said that she would provide more information about usage trends to the Group.

The Chair of Governance asked about Streetwise income from external contracts and the Communications and Customer Services Manager said that whilst the Council was still in the bedding in process, there was increased social media presence and that it was moving to increased marketing for its services.

In relation to traveller sites, the Chair of Governance noted that the Council had a statutory duty to provide sites and asked whether this meant that a development site would have to have a traveller site as part of it. The Senior Finance Business Partner explained that the Council had been out to market testing twice and had also instructed an agent which had not resulted in any interest and as such provision would be accommodated within sustainable urban extension sites allocated in the Local Plan.

The Chair of Governance asked for more information in relation to the planning costs and the percentage of costs awarded against the Council versus the cost of enforcements and the Senior Finance Business Partner said that she would report back to the Group.

The Vice Chair of Governance asked about the underspend on the homelessness grant and the Senior Finance Business Partner said that whilst there was currently no draw on that money it would not disappear and would be held in reserves until called on. In relation to Homes for Ukraine, she said that this was allocated for when people were placed within households and that whilst there were not currently any claims the money would be held for any future claims. She said that where funding was given as ringfenced it would held as ringfenced so that it could not be used for anything else.

The Vice Chair of Communities asked for an update on progress regarding the East Midlands Devolution Deal and the Service Manager said that she would take this away for review.

The Communications and Customer Services Manager presented the Q1 Performance Scorecards, as found at Appendix F, and noted the new format for the Scorecards which followed the priorities as set out in the Corporate Strategy and provided greater context to strengthen the link between task and performance.

The Communications and Customer Services Manager explained that the Council was still experiencing high levels of demand for some services but that performance was stabilising and was above target in general.

The Communications and Customer Services Manager took the Group through the seven indicators which had not reached target, being housing waste for recycling which was in line with a national reduction in waste for recycling; contamination of recycling waste which it was hoped would be reduced with the introduction of changes to bins in 2026 and which the Council was attempting to improve through a media campaign; use of community facilities which was showing signs of growth in some areas and which was being promoted through  communications and potential improvements to the booking experience.

The Communications and Customer Services Manager said that Rushcliffe Oaks Crematorium had achieved higher income than this time last year and was actively promoting its services through adverts and social media and building relationships with funeral directors and local partners.

In relation to complaints, the Communications and Customer Services Manager said that two had missed the target but that this was an anomaly and the first time that it had occurred in the last two years. In relation to Streetwise, he said that a number of external works had been won and the team was now looking at creating a balance between core work and new business. He said that Streetwise had also been awarded a £27.5k grant from Keep Britain Tidy which would help achieve its annual income target.

The Chair of Governance referred to recycling contamination and noted that potato starch packaging was an increasing source of contamination. Members of the Group asked about work taking place to educate residents, including using imaging as well as text. The Communications and Customer Services Manager said that it was hoped that the Environment Act would help educate people and also influence producers and suppliers. He said that the Council tried to produce communications that were easy to digest and understand in a few seconds and would continue to review its approach and the channels that it used to reach a wide audience.

The Vice Chair of Communities asked aboutlevels of air quality and the Service Manager for Corporate Services said that there were two Nitrous Oxide readers within the Borough at Trent Bridge and Nottingham Knight and said that as emissions were decreasing and were below where they needed to be, they may be removed.

It was RESOLVED that the Corporate Overview Group scrutinised:

a)    the expected revenue budget efficiency for the year of £1.106m and proposals to earmark this for cost pressures given at para 4.5 and Table 2

b)    the projected capital budget efficiencies of £5.968m including the reprofiling of provisions totalling £3.756m (para 4.8 and Table 3)

c)    the expected balanced outturn position for special expenses (para 4.6); and

d)    exceptions to judge whether further information is required.