Agenda item

There will be a verbal update on the draft budget at the meeting.

Councillor Richard Samuel, Cabinet Member for Economic Development and Resources introduced this item to the Panel.

He said that the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2022/23 – 2026/27 Cabinet report and supporting detailed appendices had been reviewed and discussed at the Corporate Panel on the 27th September 2021.

He stated that the high level message is that the Council faces a difficult financial scenario in 2022/23 and into 2023/24 with a lower income expected into Heritage Services.

He said that the budget funding assumptions had been reviewed and updated following the figures in relation to the Local Government Settlement. He informed the Panel that the Chancellor has ruled out a reform of Local Government funding until after the next election and reminded them that this settlement would be for one year only.

He explained that work has been done with regard to rebasing the income and expenditure 2022/23 budgets, taking account Covid and the demand on services. He added that currently there was a high volume of waste and recycling being collected across the Council.

He said that the Council were seeing additional demand from new placement and market pressures in Adult & Children Social Care.

The Chief Finance Officer (S151) addressed the Panel and sought to initially remind them that the figures for the budget are still draft. He stated that significant growth was required as Council needs £18m to provide its core services. He added that it was likely that income levels would not return to those seen pre-pandemic until 2024/25.

He said that further information regarding the budget would be available when the Panel meets again on Monday 31^st January 2022.

Councillor Winston Duguid asked if the use of £3m corporate & £2.22m service reserves was temporary and would be replaced in future years.

The Chief Finance Officer (S151) replied that it was to be a temporary use and be drawn from Financial Planning Reserves into the revenue budget 2022/23.

The Chair asked if this was an action because of the pandemic.

The Chief Finance Officer (S151) replied that it was.

Councillor Hal MacFie asked if enough consideration had been given towards Climate Change within this proposed budget.

Councillor Samuel replied that there were no reductions planned within the budget in terms of the Climate Change agenda. He added that the Sustainable Communities service had been restructured to work more effectively. He said that the intention is to maintain the current Capital Programme.

He stated that two main subjects to tackle within this area were Transport and Energy Loss from Homes and said that the Council was working hard locally on new transport measures, but that additional resources from Government were required to address energy loss.

Councillor MacFie asked if the redevelopment of the Pixash Lane site would be considered as a positive factor within the Climate Change agenda.

Councillor Samuel replied that it would and that it was good to see it coming to fruition after being in the pipeline for around a decade. He added that it was set to be a modern purpose built recycling centre that would be able to handle higher volumes of recycling.

Councillor Andrew Furse asked how the Council would deliver a significant number of e-charging points by 2030 given that there is currently no real infrastructure in place and a relatively low number of properties across the area with access to a garage or driveway.

Councillor Samuel replied that the local electrical grid was overseen by Western Power Distribution and that improvements to the grid would be required to facilitate this work. He added that he believed that this particular issue was under consideration by them and that they have a five year Capital Funding Programme that was next due to be approved in 2023.

He added that this was also a difficult practical scenario as space would be required for charging points across the city. He said that the charging points that would be installed would need to be fast charging.

Councillor Furse asked if the figure of 2% in terms of inflation was being underestimated.

Councillor Samuel replied that this figure was being held across all services and that a contingency of £2m was in place in respect of contract inflation.

Councillor Alastair Singleton asked if the proposed increase to Council Tax had been considered alongside the fact that many household budgets were also likely to increase in the coming years.

The Chief Finance Officer (S151) replied that a contingency was due to be held with regard to the Council Tax Support Scheme as officers are aware that this may be used more in the future.

Councillor Lucy Hodge asked how the CIL was to be proportioned this year.

Councillor Samuel replied that the Developer CIL had been oversubscribed and that a programme had been needed to be formed. He said that the programme was likely to be available towards the end of January.

Councillor Hodge commented that it was good to see future figures in respect of the Draft Emerging Capital Schemes.

Councillor Hodge asked why the Transport Delivery Programme was not mentioned within this budget.

The Chief Finance Officer (S151) replied that large elements of transport delivery were now involved within the City Region Sustainable Transport Settlement.

Councillor Hodge asked how the savings of £300,000 within the Adult Services budget rebase would be achieved.

The Chief Operating Officer replied that activity had dropped within the budget for Physical Disability & Sensory Impairment which has led to it being able to be rebased.

Councillor Shaun Hughes referred to Appendix 1 and in particular the proposal to introduce hourly based parking charges in Midsomer Norton and Radstock. He said that he felt the timing was not appropriate as local retail had already been hit fairly hard over the past 18 months.

Councillor Samuel replied that a review in this respect had not taken place for around eight years. He added that if the Council was not able to raise as much income it would have to consider what, if any, services could be cut.

Councillor Hughes asked when did the review take place.

Councillor Samuel replied that there had been a public consultation in 2021 and said that Parking Services had been working extensively on this matter. He added that he recognised that this would not necessarily be a popular decision.

The Chair commented that this proposal would affect the wider rural community as there are either no direct bus services or the services provided are very infrequent to these areas.

Councillor Mark Elliott asked why there was a red risk assigned to the Income - Sale of Recyclates.

The Chief Finance Officer (S151) replied that this was due to potential volatility and fluctuation in the market place.

Councillor Sally Davis said that she hoped that the proposed redesign of the CCTV service would not jeopardise the issues raised at Council in the Cross-Party Motion on Safety for Women and Girls in Public Places.

The Chief Operating Officer replied that they were mindful of the motion to Council and that this proposal would see a minor adjustment to salaries within the service and was also potentially a capital investment opportunity.

The Chair commented that she hoped that as part of the redesign of the Dog Warden Service they would be given enough authority to respond / intervene with dangerous dogs and to work with the Police.

She concluded the debate by saying that the Panel looked forward to receiving further information at the end of January.

The Panel RESOLVED to note the updated Medium Term Financial Strategy budget assumptions.