Agenda item

AGENDA ITEM 9: 2024/2025 OUTTURN REPORT

Decision

RESOLVED: To recommend the following to full Council:

a)  The provisional outturn position for the General Fund revenue account for 2024/25 (as shown in Appendix A);

b)  The transfers to and from reserves as detailed within the report (and Appendix C);

c) The surplus of £0.622m be transferred to the General reserve to mitigate future funding shortfalls.

d) The balance on the General Reserve of £2.825m following the transfer outlined above.

e) The surplus of £0.384m relating to retained business rates be transferred to the Business Rates reserve.

f) The financing of the 2024/25 capital programme as detailed within the report and at Appendix D.

g) The updated capital programme for 2025/26 to 2030/31 and scheme financing as outlined within the report and detailed at Appendix E;

h) Approval of additional funding to cover capital project overspends of £10,816 as detailed in paragraph 5.7.

i) The roll-forward of existing capital project funding from 2024/25 into 2025/26 as detailed in paragraph 5.9.

j). To note the addition of £55,000 towards the New Play Area (Sheringham, The Lees) to be funded from the Asset Management Reserve in 2025/26 for a total project budget of £120,000

k) The addition of £6,081 towards the Cromer Offices LED Lighting in the Capital Programme to be funded from Capital Receipts in 2025/26 for a total project budget of £178,796.

l) The addition of £20,000 towards the Public Conveniences (Sheringham & North Walsham) project in the Capital Programme to be funded from Capital Receipts in 2025/26 for a total project budget of £565,514.

m) The addition of the Holt Eco Learning Space scheme for £100,000 into the 2025/26 Capital Programme to be funded by an external contribution.

ACTIONS:

-        Pg.36, 3.10, the total income for 2024/25 Outturn should be amended to £36,358

-        Concerns were raised about the impact of LGR on staff recruitment and wellbeing and following advice from the Director of Service Delivery, it was agreed that a report on this matter should be brought forward to the Autumn, once the submission process for LGR had been completed.

The Chairman invited the Portfolio Holder for Finance, Cllr L Shires, to present this item.

Cllr Shires thanked the Committee and the Officers for their hard work. Cllr Shires noted the work done in 24/25 would put the council in a stronger position for the 26/27-year budget.

Cllr Shires summarised the report and the outturn position for 2024/25 which was a general fund surplus of £0.622m

Cllr Shires wished to add an additional change from Pg. 41 5.6(a) that the underspend in the Purchase of Bin capital budget be put towards the cost of delivering food waste which is not fully funded by the Council. She has suggested to Cabinet this be moved to an additional capital budget to help bring up the shortfall.

Cllr Shires suggested this be an additional recommendation.

The Chair then invited members to speak.

In response to Cllr Fletcher’s question, regarding the surplus and the general reserve levels, as to why the Council is retaining the surplus for future eventualities,   Cllr Shires said that early indicators suggest a significant shortfall in Government funding for next year and with that future uncertainty it was prudent to budget for a shortfall with the surplus the Council is putting in general reserves.

Cllr Bayes highlighted that none of the capital bids were east of North Walsham and questioned how this cycle could be broken to enable investment to come into Stalham, as all assets had been sold off in those areas. Cllr Shires explained the 25/26 budget would be monitored for future investment and that Stalham is referred to in the corporate plan. The Committee was informed that the Leader, Cllr Adams was positive about the budget, and investment, once a vision for the area was in place. It was recognised that Stalham, and other eastern areas, would be in a safer place to receive further investment beyond any current Council set up if local members for those areas continued to promote that need.

Cllr Shires provided assurance to Cllr Boyle on savings on repairs and maintenance to assets. Cllr Shires agreed that assets had previously not been invested in prior to this or previous administrations due to budget constraints but assured the committee that the underspend was only due to sound budget management by the Officers. Cllr Boyle thanked Officers and Portfolio Holders for their scrutiny.

Cllr Cushing said he was pleased to see the surplus from 2024/25 but expressed concerns around sound financial planning as back in February, an approximately £1m deficit had been anticipated and this had turned into an actual £0.660m surplus. He highlighted the £1.6m variance on forecast and asked how such a big variance could be accounted for. Cllr Cushing referred to the net cost of service which went from £23.6 million in January to just shy of £19 million which provided a variance of £4.7 million. He then questioned what assurance the Committee had in any future estimates provided given the extreme differences.

Cllr Shires explained to the Committee, that previously it had been too late to act when a deficit was identified so the way the budget monitoring process had been reviewed and changed. Technical accounting could appear delayed, but it was preferable to know the financial trajectory earlier rather than discovering issues too late.

The Assistant Director Finance and Assets explained that the £4.7m deficit was before any transfer to and from reserves, it appeared to be a large variant but excluded any use of reserves. The delays were due to reporting, either because of year end accounting adjustments or timing differences. Parking income and planning fees were hard to forecast and therefore not always fully reflected in the period 10 Budget Monitoring report.

In response to Cllr Cushing, the Assistant Director Finance and Assets explained employee costs would have been budgeted for at start of year. The variance reflected the vacancies that had not been filled, such as the Director of Resources post which was currently vacant.

In response to a further comment from Cllr Cushing, the Assistant Director Finance and Assets explained that there was every intention to fill those posts, and they were not being held open purposefully to create an underspend but that there would be specific reasons within each department as to why they remained vacant. Cllr Cushing summarised by saying he was concerned about the level of discrepancy.    Cllr Shires added that she was not concerned as this is a factual report, but she acknowledged that there was a request from Cllr Cushing to focus on staffing costs in budget monitoring going forward.

Cllr Cushing wished to make Cllr Shires aware of a typing error on Pg.36, 3.10, Table 2d, 2024/25 Outturn should be £36,358 not £26,358 as stated.

The Chair added that there was no indication that delivery or performance had been affected and asked if their wellbeing had been impacted by the increase in workload and asked where this information would be captured. Cllr Shires replied that performance is captured elsewhere, and todays was a factual, data-based report and said that she would check with Cllr Adams, in whose portfolio it sat, as to what was being done to monitor staff wellbeing.

Cllr Fredericks wished to celebrate that both Revenues and Benefits teams were nominated for national awards which indicated a high level of performance as well as celebrating all staff who maintained the highest delivery of standards which were reflected through performance reviews.

The Director of Service Delivery assured the committee that HR did monitor staff wellbeing through typical indicators reflective of the staffing cohort, such as sickness absence, and they were at or below national or regional averages, for a local authority. The JSCC (Joint Staff Consultative Committee) received reports on such issues and considered the position of wellbeing by those measures on a regular basis.

The Chair asked if the impact of LGR had been considered on staff wellbeing. The Director of Service Delivery replied that once further information was received from Government this could be brought to the Committee to discuss.

Cllr Bayes queried if the gap in staffing was due to the lack of, or qualifications, of staff applying and whether the devolution agenda was having an impact on numbers applying and leaving. Cllr Shires acknowledged this was a sound question but not relevant to the 2024/25 Outturn report. The Director of Service Delivery assured the Committee that the numbers applying for posts at the Council was very good for several positions, citing the 31 applicants for the recent Assistant Director position as an example, but explained the conscious decision around managing staffing budgets due to the financial deficit. The automatic delay and lengthy recruitment process, together with many local government workers moving between neighbouring authorities, accounted for the natural delays in filling vacancies.

The Chair referred to page 45, capital project budgets being rolled forwards, specifically those which are funded by borrowing, and wondered if there was any flexibility around that borrowing. The Assistant Director of Finance and Assets explained that this reflected internal borrowing to fund the project to help with cash flow constraints but was a stand-alone for a 1-year agreement not tied to a specific project which is held with the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB). These projects were managed on a case-by-case basis when there were no other means to fund the project such as capital receipts or grant funding, so the Council borrowed against Minimum Revenue Provision and then effectively repaid itself.

The Committee RESOLVED to make the following recommendations to Full Council:

a)  The provisional outturn position for the General Fund revenue account for 2024/25 (as shown in Appendix A).

b)  The transfers to and from reserves as detailed within the report (and Appendix C).

c) The surplus of £0.622m be transferred to the General reserve to mitigate future funding shortfalls.

d) The balance on the General Reserve of £2.825m following the transfer outlined above.

e) The surplus of £0.384m relating to retained business rates be transferred to the Business Rates reserve.

f) The financing of the 2024/25 capital programme as detailed within the report and at Appendix D.

g) The updated capital programme for 2025/26 to 2030/31 and scheme financing as outlined within the report and detailed at Appendix E.

h) Approval of additional funding to cover capital project overspends of £10,816 as detailed in paragraph 5.7.

i) The roll-forward of existing capital project funding from 2024/25 into 2025/26 as detailed in paragraph 5.9.

j). To note the addition of £55,000 towards the New Play Area (Sheringham, The Lees) to be funded from the Asset Management Reserve in 2025/26 for a total project budget of £120,000

k) The addition of £6,081 towards the Cromer Offices LED Lighting in the Capital Programme to be funded from Capital Receipts in 2025/26 for a total project budget of £178,796.

l) The addition of £20,000 towards the Public Conveniences (Sheringham & North Walsham) project in the Capital Programme to be funded from Capital Receipts in 2025/26 for a total project budget of £565,514.

m) The addition of the Holt Eco Learning Space scheme for £100,000 into the 2025/26 Capital Programme to be funded by an external contribution.

n) That the underspend in the Purchase of Bin capital budget be put towards the cost of delivering food waste and moved to an additional capital budget.