Basingstoke & Dean Borough Council Scrutiny Committee Meeting

Apologies were received from Councillor Bean and Councillor Bowes.

Councillor Izett substituted for Councillor Bean.

Councillor Johnstone substituted for Councillor Bowes.

Councillor Jones was absent.

There were no declarations of interest.

There were no urgent items.

The minutes of the meeting held on 19 September were confirmed as a correct record, subject to an amendment to the first paragraph of minute 13/23 to replace the word four with three.  The minutes were signed by the Chair.

The committee considered a report presented by the Portfolio Holder for Finance and Property.  The report presented the Cabinet’s draft budget proposals for the 2024/25 budget and the Revised Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) for 2024/25 to 2027/28.  The Portfolio Holder provided a summary of the main areas of the report such as the effect of inflation and the key priorities which included investment in the street cleansing and grounds maintenance service, play areas and affordable housing.  He also highlighted other budget changes which included changes to council tax benefits, freezing bulky waste charges and increases in fees and charges and council tax.

The committee were invited to discuss the proposals.  Questions were asked and comments were made which included:

·       In relation to support for play areas, the Portfolio Holder agreed to look at play area safety inspection costs which were passed on to parish and town councils.

·       With regard to the adoption of land from developers and commuted sums, it was suggested that additional resource was required to ensure adequate monitoring of maintenance of land once adopted and that developers had delivered what they had set out to provide.

·       The Portfolio Holder clarified that key priorities were determined by listening to residents and identifying areas where an immediate impact could be made such as street cleansing and grounds maintenance improvements.  Longer term issues such as tackling climate change and solar panels on community centres were included where it was felt that the cost implications could be reasonably absorbed into the MTFS whilst always looking at best value for residents and ensuring financial stability.

·       Several members expressed concern regarding the impact on council finances in relation to the proposed significant increase in operational costs in the Grounds maintenance and street cleansing service, particularly the significant increase in additional staff and the long-term effect on services.  The Portfolio Holder responded that more resource was required to target pockets of areas to improve the service.

·       Concern was expressed regarding depleting council reserves when a budget deficit gap of £5.76 million was projected by 2027.

·       Whilst the huge increase in staffing in grounds maintenance and street cleansing was a concern, the emphasis on service improvement was welcomed, however enforcement was a concern regarding poor service delivered by housing associations.  It was suggested that there should be more emphasis on strategic planning and better collaboration with housing associations and private landowners to shift the emphasis to preventative measures. More effective enforcement regarding issues such as litter drops and commercial shop areas and holding people to account, particularly commercial owners was also highlighted. 

·       It was suggested that consideration be given to utilising the ongoing saving from bus services that had been taken on commercially by Stagecoach to improve public transport in other areas.

·       Concern was raised that reserves were being used to fund ongoing commitments and initiatives. It was clarified that reserves were not being used on a recurring basis to fund any element of the budget.  In terms of the budget proposals, funding was put into reserves at the end of the last financial year as a result of a surplus and was put aside to specifically fund ongoing service improvements linked to achieving the priorities of the council plan. Further explanation was given regarding the existing risk reserves and budget gap that would need to be met in future years.

·       Clarity was provided regarding the role of the Section 151 officer to support and advise the administration in terms of supporting the council’s priorities and how they were funded but also monitoring the finances of the council to ensure prudence in financial management.  Assurance was given that operational activity was not being funded from long term reserves.

·       In relation to concerns regarding how the budget gap would be addressed, the committee were informed that action to close the budget gap would be implemented partly through updating the MTFS over the four year period with focus on service efficiencies, treasury management, policy review, asset management and government funding.  The budget proposals considered in February would include the full MTFS document which would include horizon scanning and understanding of assumptions made over the four year MTFS period.  There were several factors that could change the bottom line some of which could potentially assist in closing the budget gap.

·       It was clarified that the MTFS document presented in February would address any impacts on service delivery as a result of Hampshire County Councils budget proposals.

·       Explanation was provided on how assumptions for inflation were applied to the budget proposals. 

·       It was questioned whether consideration had been given to freezing car park charges given the challenges faced by the town centre particularly Festival Place.  The Portfolio holder responded that it was about striking a balance.  Reducing the council’s car park charges would impact on Festival Place who relied on parking income and making it cheaper to drive would not encourage people to shift to more sustainable models of transport.

·       The proposal to increase staffing resources in the property services team to manage the council’s property portfolio was welcomed.

·       Concern was raised regarding the council tax reduction scheme and non-domestic rates discretionary relief.  It was suggested that consideration be made to deferring changes to the schemes for a year rather than abandoning any changes or review.

·       In relation to an increase in bank charges for card payments, officers agreed to circulate information on the percentage of residents paying council tax by card and via direct debit.

Councillor Carr proposed a recommendation regarding the committee’s concerns in relation to the drawdown on reserves, whether the significant increase in spending was responsible and would open the budget gap and reduce financial resilience, whether the increase in staffing was financially sustainable over the long term and that cabinet should outline a concrete plan to close the budget deficit. 

The section 151 officer responded that it would not be appropriate to try and detail now, how to close the budget gap in four years’ time considering the amount of uncertainty during that period.  The MTFS sets out the multi-pronged approach to be considered to do this. The committee discussed the recommendation which was subsequently amended as some members felt it was not an accurate reflection of the committee’s views.  The recommendation was further amended to request cabinet to revisit the proposals for a significant increase in staffing and potential long-term impacts that could have, which was supported by the committee.

Councillor Basham requested that it be noted that he applauded Cabinet on various items upon which they were spending and allocating residents funds: solar PV project, enhancements of play area programme areas, additional play area officer, development of new health hub in the top of the town, extra tree maintenance, freezing bulky waste.  He felt the budget was full of excellent investments for the borough and residents.

Resolved: The committee recommends that Cabinet

1.      Consider the comments of the committee as above.

2.      Consider deferring changes to the council tax reduction scheme and non-domestic rates discretionary relief for a year.

3.      Re-visit the proposals for a significant increase in staffing and potential long-term financial impacts this could have.

The committee considered its work programme.

It was confirmed that a meeting of the performance panel would be held prior to the committee’s consideration of performance indicators scheduled for January’s meeting.

New topics for review were suggested:

·       To invite the police, Community Safety Team and HCC to provide an update on action being taken to address road noise, car meets and noise cameras.

·       To scrutinise the operation of the Communications Protocol.

The Chair requested that members complete a topic suggestion form for the proposed new items.

The Chair advised that the transport task and finish group would commence once further detail had emerged from HCC regarding its support for public and community transport.  The Chair would email all members to invite nominations to the group.