Council and councillors

To receive Report No. 50/2017 from the Cabinet on recommendations referred to the Council for determination and to note the Key Decisions taken at its meetings held on 10 January 2017, 17 January 2017 and 14 February 2017.

--o0o—

The Chairman reminded members of the mandatory requirement to record votes on budgetary matters.

--o0o--

Report No. 50/2017 from the Cabinet was received to consider the recommendations of Cabinet referred to the Council for determination and to note the Key Decisions made by Cabinet at its meetings held on 10 January 2017, 17 January 2017 and 14 February 2017.

1)    Council NOTED the Key Decisions made by Cabinet since the publication of the agenda for the previous ordinary meeting of the Council on 9 January 2017 as detailed in Appendix A to Report No. 50/2017.

2)     17 January 2017

Decision No. 495

Report No. 22/2017

Placement for Pupils with Special Education Needs or Disabilities

Mr Wilby introduced and moved the recommendations in the report.  Mr Mathias seconded the recommendations.

During his introduction, Mr Wilby explained that the recommendation to use grant funding would enable a review of the SEND provision with the aim of reducing the need to send children out of County which would reduce costs and improve the service.

During debate of the recommendation, points raised included:

               i.        Miss Waller supported the recommendation as it would be a great improvement for children and their families for them to be educated closer to home.  Miss Waller requested that ordinary schools were approached to give their perspective regarding the support provided to children with Education, Health and Care plans; and

              ii.        Mr Wilby clarified that the aim would be to avoid placing children several miles away, but where a child lived near the Rutland border and a suitable placement could be found just over the border in another County, this would still be considered.

RESOLVED

Council APPROVED that £15.5k of grant funding in 2016/17 for High Needs Strategic Planning and the Special Educational Needs or Disabilities (SEND) reform grant funding for 2017/18 of £28k be used to support delivery of the action plan.

The above resolution was voted as follows:

FOR THE MOTION (24)

Mr Baines, Mr Begy, Mr Bird, Mr Bool, Mrs Burkitt, Mr Callaghan, Mr Clifton, Mr Conde, Mr Cross, Mr Dale, Mr Foster, Mr Gale, Mr Hemsley, Mr Lammie, Mrs MacDuff, Mr Mann, Mr Mathias, Mr Oxley, Mr Parsons, Mrs Stephenson, Mr Stewart, Miss Waller, Mr Walters, Mr Wilby.

AGAINST THE MOTION (0)

ABSTAINING FROM VOTING (0)

3)     17 January 2017

Decision No. 498

Report No. 23/2017

Fees and Charges 2017/18

Mr Mathias introduced and moved the recommendations in the report.  Mr Hemsley seconded the recommendations.

During debate of the recommendation, points raised included:

               i.        Mr Oxley was concerned that the recommendation to increase the parking charges in Uppingham to bring them in line with Oakham car parking charges could dissuade people from visiting Uppingham to do their shopping.  Mr Oxley stated that it would have been useful to have debated this item more fully as part of the Scrutiny process;

              ii.        Clarification was provided by Mr Mathias that this item was debated as part of the Budget Scrutiny meetings on 18 January 2017;

            iii.        Mr  ...  view the full minutes text for item 619

(KEY DECISION)

Report No. 44/2017

(KEY DECISION)

Report No. 44/2017 from the Director for Resources was received.

Mr Mathias, Leader of the Council, introduced the report, the purpose of which was to recommend to Council the final budget for 2017/18 and the Medium Term Financial Plan.

Mr Mathias confirmed that this report had been looked at in draft format by Cabinet on 10 January 2017, it had also been presented to all Scrutiny Panels at joint meetings held on 18 January 2017as well as being the subject of public consultation.  A presentation had also been delivered to the Parish Council Forum and the Rutland Annual Business Summit.  Scrutiny had asked for areas of clarification, but had not put forward any changes.  Questions had also been asked by members of the public and the main theme coming forward from the public was that there is an understanding of the current financial position, but the perception is that Rutland County Council is not low cost. It had been confirmed that Rutland was, however, the third lowest cost Authority out of all Unitary Authorities in the United Kingdom and this should be publicised.

During discussion the following points were raised:

       i.          Members of the public did not see Rutland as low cost based on consultation feedback. Rutland is low cost per head of population across the services it provides and it was acknowledged that more could be done to publicise this.  It was also noted that Rutland does have high Council Tax and low levels of funding from Government.  Members thought it would be useful if all of these factors could be presented in a way to get across some key messages;

      ii.          The Leader explained that some changes had been made to the budget and these were detailed in Appendix 11 of Report 44/2017– most were the result of additional funding being received;;

    iii.          The Cabinet recommendation would be to raise Council Tax by 3.99%, including a 2% precept for Adult Social Care rather than the 3% allowed. Whilst the Council is experiencing cost pressures in adult social care, the 2% was deemed sufficient to cover the associated costs.  Members acknowledged that it was important not to raise a precept for any more than would be necessary to meet demand and at present there was no evidence of a surge in demand for Adult Social Care.  Should an increased in demand occur in year, reserves could be used to supplement the budget for Adult Social Care;

    iv.          It was noted that those working in Adult Social Care are doing well to manage demand and keep costs low, whilst maintaining high standards.  In particular,  delays in hospital discharges had been significantly reduced, 91% of people receiving reablement care after being discharged from hospital were staying at home and not being re-admitted; and less people were going in to permanent residential care;

     v.          The actual impact of the Council Tax increase on a Band D property would be just under £60 but this would clearly still have an impact  ...  view the full minutes text for item 581