Agenda item - FIRST QUARTER REVENUE MONITORING 2018/19

REPORT OF: SERVICE DIRECTOR – RESOURCES

To inform Cabinet of the summary position on revenue income and expenditure forecasts for financial year 2018/19, as at the end of the first quarter.

RESOLVED:

(1) That the report entitled First Quarter Revenue Monitoring 2018/19 be noted;

(2) That the changes to the 2018/19 General Fund budget, as identified in table 3 and paragraph 8.2, a £30k increase in net expenditure be approved;

(3) That the changes to the 2019/20 General Fund budget, as identified in table 3 and paragraph 8.2, a £55k decrease in net expenditure and that these will be incorporated in the draft revenue budget for 2019/20 be noted;

(4) That the proposal, as outlined in paragraph 8.3, to recruit two additional officers to embed the principles of commercialisation and develop commercial activity across the authority be noted and the required adjustments within the overall budgetary framework to the 2018/19 budget of £62,500 be approved.

REASON FOR DECISION: Members are able to monitor, make adjustments within the overall budgetary framework and request appropriate action of Services who do not meet the budget targets set as part of the Corporate Business Planning process.

The Executive Member for Finance and IT presented the report of the Service Director – Resources in respect of First Quarter Revenue Monitoring 2018/19.

The Executive Member for Finance and IT drew attention to the following:

Paragraph 7.2 – Table 2

· Commercialism

It should be noted that the reason that the figure for Commercialism was negative was that it included approximately £1 million of income from assets.

Paragraph 8.1

· Hitchin Town Hall Community Facility Income

The original intention was that the whole facility would had been to allow facility to be upgraded and opened to provide an increased revenue flow. The facility was providing some a revenue low, but it was not as high as hoped and expected. It was important to get whole facility in use as intended, but if this could not be achieved adjustments may need to be made to the budget.

· District Elections

The Service Director - Resources advised that elections covered a wider area in some years, whereas the budget reflected an average figure.

· Processing of Comingled Recyclables

It was becoming increasingly difficult to dispose of recyclables and prices were much reduced. This was a risk that had been identified at the beginning of the year.

· Net Income from the Garden Waste Collection Service

The decision to charge for garden waste was taken last year. The prediction had been for a 26 percent take up of the service, but it had been more popular and the actual take up figure was over 50 percent, hence the significant variation.

This figure was the difference between what we paid Urbaser to collect the brown bins and the amount collected for the service. The figure did not include the overheads of Council and work would have to be undertaken to identify these costs.

Three Rivers Council intended to increase the cost for this service to £40, on a 75 percent take up, and they did not believe they were making a surplus.

Paragraph 8.3

It was proposed that, following the senior management restructure, two offices be recruited to the Commercial Support Team. It was intended to use special reserves for two years and aim for the posts to become self-funding after that.

Paragraph 8.7

The budget for car parking fees was based on the income anticipated to be derived from the outcome of the Strategic Parking Review. Due to the delay of the Parking Review no income raising measures had been implemented and therefore there was a risk that the anticipated level of income may not be met.

In respect of Careline, the Executive Member for Housing and Environmental Health advised that maintenance costs have risen, although this was being looked at. There had been some reliance on agency staff, with associated costs, there was however a successful programme to turn some of those agency staff into permanent staff, which not only provided financial benefit, but also provided stability to the service. The partnership with Hertfordshire County Council remained strong and business was increasing.

In respect of Planning Control Fees, the Executive Member for Planning, Enterprise and Transport advised that £79,000 was awarded as costs relating to an appeal. Since then there had been two more successful appeals with costs awarded against the Council. These figures did not include the costs for the Council and as an indication the fees payable for legal fees associated with a recent public enquiry amounted to approximately £50,000. As the Local Plan progressed the Council has seen a number of aggressive applications, which the Council has had to defend rigorously and it was likely that more applications such as this would be made.