Agenda item

To review the Budget Monitoring report and make any recommendations to Full Council.

 9.40-10.10am

Cllr Gray joined the meeting.

Cllr L Shires presented the report noting that the significant change from period 6 related to the extended responsibility producer grant which had previously been held in reserves. This had now been released to cover service costs with the balance being available to offset the anticipated cost of food waste recycling. In response to a question from Cllr Hankins, the Director for Resources provided further detail noting that during the earlier budgeting process there had been a lack of clarity available as to how the grant could be spent and therefore a prudent approach had been taken. This clarity was now available and therefore this reserve could be released.

Cllr Cushing asked for clarification of the impact of the anticipated savings of £420k noted on page 39 section 4.2, and whether those savings where embedded into future activities. Cllr Shires referred to the budget monitoring savings and income paper on page 71 of the report which outlined the differences and confirmed she had no concerns, save for the impact of unknown matters. Cllr Fletcher queried the variance on page 57, paragraph 3, relating to the kennelling costs that were associated with an enforcement case. Cllr Shires confirmed she would ask the relevant portfolio holder to respond.

Cllr Fletcher also asked for further information regarding efficiencies and savings during staff recruitment and investment in apprenticeships within the organisation. Cllr Shires confirmed that vacancies could be held open if it was believed there was capacity but otherwise the delays were often out of the Council’s control but had a beneficial financial impact. Cllr Shires noted she was proud of the investment in apprenticeships which allowed individuals into different jobs and a route into local government. Following a question from Cllr K Bayes, Cllr Shires indicated she would respond separately with the number of apprentices and whether the Council maximised its levy in this regard.

Cllr Cushing asked for clarification, following a response Cllr Vickers had received from the Chief Executive, regarding the removal of the staff from the Connect building in Fakenham, he clarified he was not questioning the operational decision, but whether the item was identified within the budget setting process. Cllr Shires confirmed that this service change was not specifically highlighted within budget setting process and she was not aware of the change until after the conclusion of that process. Cllr L Withington informed the Committee that this was something that had been proposed as a potential cost saving and would not have been a specific item in the budget.

Cllr Cushing asked for clarification as to whether it would be possible to have year on year likely spend in terms of the capital programme, particularly, for example, the FLASH project, as well as an indication of whether the spend was funded by central government grant or NNDC funds. Cllr Shires referred to the line by split of funding at the base of the capital programme in the report. The Director for Resources explained that when this capital programme was originally put together it would have been in December 2024 and a simple and prudent approach would have been taken as it would have impacted on necessary borrowing and cash flow exposure and therefore it would have been important to consider all possible outflows in the year. The Director for Resources suggested that it might be possible to include a note of where funding was originating from but would complicate the report. Cllr Shires suggested that perhaps once per year this information could be provided with the outturn report.

Cllr Hankins asked about the reference to housing s.106 enabling fund, what was being enabled and he recalled comments about s.106 funding arrangements. in audit reports. The Assistant Director of Finance stated this money was connected to affordable homes contributions from developers. He confirmed there had been audit recommendations relating to s.106 funds and there was a programme of work to close those actions and the potential for clawback was being closely monitored.

The Chair noted the shortfall in rent of beach huts (Page 37) but queried on page 97 in the action plan a further £30k income was anticipated. Cllr Shires explained that the decision to change the length of leases resulted in a drop in income but that leases were also being reviewed commercially, leading to rent increases which would result in this additional income.

The Chair asked for clarification on page 38 of the interest rates and charges connected with public works loan of £5m. The ADF, confirmed that one loan lasted for a whole year, the other lasted less than one month which gave rise to the difference. The Chair also noted that on Page 37 there was a season ticket income reduction and asked for information as to why this was the case. Cllr Shires confirmed the team would investigate the data on this and report back to the Committee.

Cllr Bayes asked for clarification on reprographics amount, Cllr Shires confirmed there had been some tidying up of where costs were held in this area. Cllr Shires also clarified, following an additional question regarding the collector’s cabin roof, that the roofs that were thatched didn’t cost as much as anticipated.

Following a proposal by Cllr Fletcher which was seconded by Cllr Rouse, it was resolved unanimously to

a) Note the contents of the report and the current forecast year end position.

b) Seek approval of Full Council to increase the 2025/26 capital budget for Disabled Facilities Grants to £2,317,266. This is to reflect the addition of £118,204 of grant award towards the scheme

c) To use the Extended Responsibility Producer grant of £1,312,840, which was previously forecasted to be an in-year contribution to reserves, to offset relevant in year recycling expenditure.

d) That the resulting underspend of £1,312,840 in the respective recycling revenue budgets be transferred to the General Reserve to mitigate future unfunded new burdens