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 Walters highlighted that it had been requested by Members that proposals to change fees and charges would be brought earlier in future years to allow for full scrutiny of the proposals;

            iv.        Mr Clifton stated that any amendment to the proposals on fees and charges would impact on the budget.

 

Mr Oxley proposed an amendment to recommendation 3) a) of Report 23/2017 as follows:

 

“That approval of the level of fees and charges for 2017/18 set out in Report 23/2017 be deferred to allow for Places Scrutiny Panel to consider the increase in parking charges in Uppingham”

 

Upon being put to the vote, the AMENDMENT was DEFEATED.

 

The above resolution was voted as follows:

FOR THE MOTION (7)

Mr Begy, Mrs Burkitt, Mr Cross, Mrs MacDuff, Mr Oxley, Mrs Stephenson, Miss Waller.

AGAINST THE MOTION (17)

Mr Baines, Mr Bird, Mr Bool, Mr Callaghan, Mr Clifton, Mr Conde, Mr Dale, Mr Foster, Mr Gale, Mr Hemsley, Mr Lammie, Mr Mann, Mr Mathias, Mr Parsons, Mr Stewart, Mr Walters, Mr Wilby.

ABSTAINING FROM VOTING (0)

The SUBSTANTIVE MOTION was put to the vote and it was RESOLVED

3.1      To APPROVE the level of fees and charges for 2017/18 as set out in Appendices 1 to 4 of Report 23/2017;

The above resolution was voted as follows:

FOR THE MOTION (18)

Mr Baines, Mr Begy, Mr Bird, Mr Bool, Mr Callaghan, Mr Clifton, Mr Conde, Mr Dale, Mr Foster, Mr Gale, Mr Hemsley, Mr Lammie, Mrs MacDuff, Mr Mann, Mr Mathias, Mrs Stephenson, Mr Stewart, Mr Wilby.

AGAINST THE MOTION (2)

Mrs Burkitt, Mr Cross.

ABSTAINING FROM VOTING (4)

Mr Oxley, Mr Parsons, Miss Waller, Mr Walters.

3.2      That the Director for Places (Environment, Planning and Transport) be AUTHORISED to waive the fee for the registration of a permissive pathway if there is a significant public benefit, in consultation with the relevant portfolio holder.

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)

--o0o--

The Chairman confirmed that the recommendation concerning the Treasury Management Strategy would now be taken before the recommendation concerning the Budget and Medium Term Financial Plan.

--o0o--

 

4)     14 February 2017

Decision No. 582

Report No. 41/2017

Treasury Management Strategy 2017/18

 

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

 

RESOLVED

 

Council  APPROVED the Treasury Management Strategy in Appendix 1 (Report 41/2017), including the Investment Strategy, Borrowing strategy, Minimum Revenue Provision statement and Capital Expenditure Prudential indicators.

 

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)

5)     14 February 2017

Decision No. 581

Report No. 44/2017

Revenue and Capital Budget 2017/18 and Medium Term Financial Plan

 

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

Mr Mathias introduced the report as follows:

Unusually this budget is to be debated by Council in the absence of a final settlement from the Government. It is thought that the delay in the final settlement may be due to significant pressure for government consideration to a last minute, further contribution to Adult Social Care.

I am sure that Council would prefer not to be having to be considering a 1.99% increase in council tax and an increase of 2% for Adult Social Care (ASC).

It is these percentages that are needed from our Council tax payers in order to balance the budget, and for a Band D property it amounts to £30 per annum for the Council tax increase and a further £30 per annum for the ASC precept. For those in receipt of Local Council Tax Support the increases are proportionate to the discount received. Those in receipt of maximum support are often in Band A to Band C properties and would face increases of between 19 and 25 pence per week

The four year settlement has introduced more certainty in terms of what we should expect from central government, and has given us the ability to plan savings in such a way as to have the least possible effect on front line services.

The budget has been presented to the Scrutiny Panels, Parish Forum, Annual Business Summit and the Local Strategic Partnership Executive and consultation with the public.

The budget for 2017/2018 shows a net overall spending of 33k more than the original 16/17 budget, despite significant pressures (appendix 7 page 120) of £1.32m and a 250k contingency for ASC.  This is against a backdrop of a reduction in the Revenue Support Grant of £1.5m. Members should note that this will be the last year that the authority receives the revenue support grant.

The Council is the third lowest spending, per head, of unitary Councils in the country. It also receives some of the lowest, per head, support from government.

The Council will continue to lobby government hard for fairer funding in the years ahead, not least for ASC.

Members will be aware of the results of our recent Ofsted report. The People Directorate are satisfied that the current resourcing levels are sufficient to deal with current service pressures and to deal with any issues arising from this report.

We have had a peak of demand impacting on Fostering and Adoption and Early Intervention, this has contributed to the pressures acknowledged within the budget. Work is being done in Early Help and within Fostering and Adoption that will address the issues as we have previously indicated in quarterly reports and in mitigation of the pressure currently being experienced.

But back to Adult Social Care. Our performance in this area is extremely good. I note from various news reports today that of the 151 social care authorities, 108 (72%) are considering or proposing a 3% ASC precept.

As already mentioned the budget includes a 250k contingency and there are significant reserves should unanticipated demand occur in 17/18. There are some who have proposed that this Council should raise the ASC precept to 3% rather than the 2% proposed. Cabinet have debated this at length, but came to the conclusion that we can manage, at least for 17/18 with the proposed 2%. Without certainty of an increase in demand, There is no justification for more at this time.

Although the MTFP shows that the budget for 17/18 is balanced, members will have noted that there is still a lot of work to do in future years to continue to provide balanced budgets. To this end portfolio holders are already working with officers to achieve this, and minimise council tax increases in future years.

To have proposed a Council Tax increase of less than 1.99%, together with an ASC precept of less than 2% would have a dire effect on the medium term financial plan and therefore future budget recommendations.

I hope members will be reassured that portfolio holders and Officers are confident that the budget proposed will be enough, but not too much, to support us to continue to deliver Council services to all, and especially our most vulnerable.

I therefore propose that council approves the decision recommendations as shown in item 4, items a) through to I) in the revenue and capital budget 2017/2018 report, en bloc.

During debate of the recommendation, points raised included:

               i.        Mr Conde recognised the prudency of raising a 2% Adult Social Care precept this year, with the option of raising a further precept in coming years once the impact of the Sustainability and Transformation Programme (STP) became evident;

              ii.        In response to a question from Mr Gale, the Chief Executive confirmed that Rutland would be funded differently if it were to become a District as allocation of funding from Central Government would change;

            iii.        Miss Waller also highlighted the uncertainty of the outcome of the STP and also raised that moving from inpatient care to care at home could be an issue in Rutland where it was difficult to recruit home care workers.  There was no benefit to recommending a higher increase at present, though it was clear that more funding would need to be found in the future;

            iv.        Miss Waller asked concerning recommendation h) in the report why the use of reserves for budget carry forwards is not currently shown in the budget?  It was confirmed that this was a Statement of Accounts issue, there would be no way of knowing the amount of carry forward until the end of the year.

RESOLVED

Council:

5.1APPROVED the revenue budget for 2017/18 shown in summary at Appendix 1, Section 3 and in detail at Appendices 3, 4 and 5;

5.2APPROVED that the minimum level of general reserves remains at £2m over the period of the medium term financial plan;

5.3APPROVED a council tax increase of 3.99% including a 2% social care precept;

5.4APPROVED the capital programme as detailed in Section 4 of Appendix 1;

5.5NOTED the Medium Term Financial Plan at Appendix 2 and underlying assumptions;

5.6APPROVED the increase of the ceiling on the social care earmarked reserve to £1m and AUTHORISED the Assistant Director – Finance to top up the reserve to £1m as part of the 16/17 outturn;

5.7APPROVED the creation of a new “pressures” earmarked reserve with a ceiling of £1m as per Appendix 1 para 2.7.8, and AUTHORISED the Assistant Director – Finance to put an initial contribution of £500k that reserve as part of the 16/17 outturn;

5.8NOTED that additional revenue or capital expenditure may be incurred in 2017/18 funded through 2016/17 budget under spends to be carried forward via earmarked reserves. The use of reserves for budget carry forwards is not currently shown in the budget but will have no impact on the General Fund; and

5.9APPROVED a collection fund surplus of £196,000 for distribution of which £170,000 is the Rutland share.

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)