Corporate Management Committee Tuesday 8 December 2015 at 7.30pm Council Chamber Runnymede Civic Centre, Addlestone Members of the Committee Councillors P I Roberts (Chairman), Ms C M Simmons (Vice-Chairman), A Alderson, J M Edwards, Mrs L M Gillham, Miss M N Heath, Mrs G M Kingerley, H W V Meares, P B Tuley and P J Waddell AGENDA Notes: 1) Any report on the Agenda involving confidential information (as defined by section 100A(3) of the Local Government Act 1972) must be discussed in private. Any report involving exempt information (as defined by section 100I of the Local Government Act 1972), whether it appears in Part 1 or Part 2 below, may be discussed in private but only if the Committee so resolves. 2) The relevant 'background papers' are listed after each report in Part 1. Enquiries about any of the Agenda reports and background papers should be directed in the first instance to Mr J Gurmin, Democratic Services Section, Law and Governance Business Centre, Runnymede Civic Centre, Station Road, Addlestone (Tel: Direct Line: 01932 425624). (Email: [email protected]). 3) Agendas and Minutes are available on a subscription basis. For details, please ring Mr B A Fleckney on 01932 425620. Agendas and Minutes for all the Council's Committees may also be viewed on www.runnymede.gov.uk. 4) In the unlikely event of an alarm sounding, members of the public should leave the building immediately, either using the staircase leading from the public gallery or following other instructions as appropriate. 'see overleaf' - 1 - X:\Wpcmast\Agendas\Corporate Management Comm\2015\12\Corporate Management 081215 Agenda.docx
Transcript
Corporate Management Committee
Tuesday 8 December 2015 at 7.30pm
Council Chamber Runnymede Civic Centre, Addlestone
Members of the Committee Councillors P I Roberts (Chairman), Ms C M Simmons (Vice-Chairman), A Alderson, J M Edwards, Mrs L M Gillham, Miss M N Heath, Mrs G M Kingerley, H W V Meares, P B Tuley and P J Waddell
AGENDA
Notes:
1) Any report on the Agenda involving confidential information (as defined by section 100A(3)of the Local Government Act 1972) must be discussed in private. Any report involvingexempt information (as defined by section 100I of the Local Government Act 1972), whetherit appears in Part 1 or Part 2 below, may be discussed in private but only if the Committeeso resolves.
2) The relevant 'background papers' are listed after each report in Part 1. Enquiries about anyof the Agenda reports and background papers should be directed in the first instance toMr J Gurmin, Democratic Services Section, Law and Governance Business Centre,Runnymede Civic Centre, Station Road, Addlestone (Tel: Direct Line: 01932 425624).(Email: [email protected]).
3) Agendas and Minutes are available on a subscription basis. For details, please ringMr B A Fleckney on 01932 425620. Agendas and Minutes for all the Council's Committeesmay also be viewed on www.runnymede.gov.uk.
4) In the unlikely event of an alarm sounding, members of the public should leave the buildingimmediately, either using the staircase leading from the public gallery or following otherinstructions as appropriate.
5) Filming, Audio-Recording, Photography, Tweeting and Blogging of Meetings
Members of the public are permitted to film, audio record, take photographs or make use ofsocial media (tweet/blog) at Council and Committee meetings provided that this does notdisturb the business of the meeting. If you wish to film a particular meeting, please liaisewith the Council Officer listed on the front of the Agenda prior to the start of the meeting sothat the Chairman is aware and those attending the meeting can be made aware of anyfilming taking place.
Filming should be limited to the formal meeting area and not extend to those in the publicseating area.
The Chairman will make the final decision on all matters of dispute in regard to the use ofsocial media, audio-recording, photography and filming in the Committee meeting.
If you need help reading this document please contact the Council on 01932 838383. We will try to provide a reading service, a large print version, or another format.
The Chairman will read the Fire Precautions which set out the procedures to be followed inthe event of fire or other emergency.
2. NOTIFICATION OF CHANGES TO COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
3. MINUTES
To confirm and sign the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 29 October 2015at Appendix ‘A’.
4. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
5. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
If Members have an interest in an item, please record the interest on the form circulatedwith this Agenda and hand it to the Legal Representative or Committee Administrator at thestart of the meeting. A supply of the form will also be available from the CommitteeAdministrator at meetings.
Members are advised to contact the Council’s Legal section prior to the meeting if they wishto seek advice on a potential interest.
Members who have previously declared interests which are recorded in the Minutes to beconsidered at this meeting need not repeat the declaration when attending the meeting.Members need take no further action unless the item in which they have an interestbecomes the subject of debate, in which event the Member must leave the room if theinterest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or if the interest could reasonably be regarded asso significant as to prejudice the Member’s judgement of the public interest.
6. QUARTERLY BUDGET MONITORING REPORT – APRIL TO SEPTEMBER 2015(RESOURCES)
Synopsis of report:
To report progress against the revised General Fund, HRA and capital budgets for 2015/16.
Recommendation:
The cost of the income generating capital works is met from the General Fund reserves as detailed in paragraph 2.2 of this report.
1. Context of report
1.1 The Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS), the Capital Programme and the detailed General Fund budgets for 2015/16 were approved by the Corporate Management Committee on 22 January 2015 and subsequently by full Council in February 2015.
1.2 The detailed HRA budget for 2015/16 was approved by the Housing Committee on 14 January 2015 and subsequently by full Council in February 2015.
1.3 Starting in July, all budget managers are provided with a monthly budgetary control statement showing total budget, profiled budget, spend to date and commitments. A
full salary listing is also provided on an ad-hoc basis. Budget managers, working with a dedicated accountant, project likely spend to 31 March.
1.4 Budget Managers constantly monitor their budgets and are accountable for their budget and service performance. The projected outturns shown in this report are manager’s best estimates as at 30 September 2015.
2. General Fund Revenue Budget
2.1 The detailed General Fund budget for 2015/16 was approved in February 2015along with the Medium Term Financial Forecast. Since then various changes haveoccurred to the budgets – including £836,000 of supplementary estimates relating to2015/16 - and updated figures for the current and next two financial years can beseen from the table below.
2015/16 £’000
2016/17 £’000
2017/18 £’000
Net Expenditure on Services: 10,883 8,138 6,269 Planned underspends carried forward from 2014/15: 646 - - Supplementary Estimates: • Increase in Planning Development staffing (CMC 22
Jan 15) 65 65 65
• Members ICT allowance (CMC 26 Feb 15) 85 28 28 • Magna Carta additional Support (CMC 26 Feb 15) 7 - - • Appointment of asset valuers (SO42 Apr 15) 4 • Community Services staffing (SO42 March 15) - 21 - • Risk and Resilience services (CMC 2 Apr 15) 14 8 7 • Housing staff restructuring (net) (CMC 2 Apr 15) 21 21 21 • Customer Services Team staffing (SO42 May 15) 57 57 57 • River Thames scheme (CMC 28 May 15)* 84 84 84 • Electoral Services staffing (CMC 28 May 15) 9 12 3 • Private Sector Rented Scheme (Hsg 10 Jun 15) 16 14 6 • Upgrade of Environmental Health Post (E&S 18 Jun
15) - 4 4
• Pest control/stray dog contract (E&S 18 Jun 15) 3 4 - • Employment Skills scheme (CS 17 Jun 15) 10 25 15 • Community Meals Service (CS 17 Jun 15) 7 7 7 • Head of Human Resources (CMC 25 Jun 15) 6 24 24 • Planning Officer (Local Plan) (SO42 July 15) 13 50 37 • Increased Customer Services hours (SO42 July 15) 3 3 3 • Housing Options Officer post retention (Hsg 2 Sep
15) 15 30 30
• Egham Museum Funding (CMC 24 Sep 15) 10 20 10 Revised Net Expenditure on Services 11,958 8,615 6,655
* The 2015/16 Council Tax was increased specifically to fund this scheme.
2.2 The following budgets have also been agreed by Members relating to the investment in capital assets which generate an income for the Council in future years. It is recommended that these be funded from the General Fund Working Balance.
2.3 In addition to the supplementary estimates approved above, the Environment and Sustainability Committee at its meeting on 17 September 2015 also recommended that the Corporate Management Committee approve a further £108,900 a year made up as follows:
• A new Street Cleansing post (£23,300)• Additional Street Cleansing late shift working (£8,500)• Costs associated with new Street Cleansing equipment (£9,200)• A new Environmental Health Officer Post (£60,500)• Environmental Health regrading (£7,400)
2.4 These items at paragraph 2.3 above have yet to be presented to the Corporate Management Committee and therefore have not been included in the table above.
2.5 Elsewhere on this agenda is a Part II exempt report from the Chief Executive on proposed Council reorganisation. This identifies savings of £258k of which £170.5k can be applied to the creation and redesignation of various posts including the two environmental health posts identified in paragraph 2.3 above.
2.6 Following these adjustments the restructure, if approved, still leaves a saving of £88k towards offsetting the cost pressures identified below in paragraph 2.8.
2.7 A summary General Fund monitoring report is set out in Appendix ‘B’ which sets net expenditure at the end of September 2015 against the revised budget at that date. This shows that net expenditure on services to date is £14.626m which is £0.234m more than the profiled budget.
2.8 The projected year-end forecast at net expenditure on services level is an overspend of £579,000 against the approved budget. The more significant variances, based on comparing the current budget to the forecast outturn, are as follows:
Revised budget to forecast 2015/16 – Significant variances Expend
£000 Income
£000 Housing Committee • Housing Redundancy costs arising from re-structuring 10 • Enabling – Deferment of Housing Needs Survey to 2016/17 (35) • Enabling – Deferment of private sector stock condition survey (40) • Benefits – Recovery of legal fees (25)
Community Services Committee • Community Transport – increased cost of wages 14 • Community Transport – increased cost of transport 49 • Community Transport – Expected increase income (17) • Community Services Admin – Recharge of time to Surrey (50)
2015/16 2016/17 2017/18£’000 £’000 £’000
• Property works to Chertsey Rec Lodge (CMC 26 Feb 15) 50 - -• Orchard Cottage refurbishment (CMC 2 Apr 15) 20 - -• Specialist regeneration advice (CMC 28 May 15) 250 - -• Ashdene House redevelopment (SO42 Sept 15)** 87 113
407 113 0
** The 2016/17 budget may be capitalised if scheme progresses
Heath for the services of the independent Living Manager • Day centres – additional income from lettings (10) • Parks- Income from parking at Homewood park 8 • Parks – Income from Fields in trust towards the cost of play
equipment (10) • Parks – Loss of income from residential dwelling at Chertsey
Rec 6 • Lettings income at the Hythe centre lower than expected 16 • Meals on Wheels – Reduced income due to less meals being
sold, this is partially offset by reduction in the amount spent on food 17
• Community Alarms – Increased rental income (13) • Safer Runnymede –Savings on cable rental and control
equipment (28)
Environment and Sustainability Committee • Contaminated Land – consultants budget moved into 2016/17 (5) • Local Air Pollution – Air Quality saving on consultants budget (9) • DSO wages – additional cost of casuals 80 • Recycling initiatives provision reduced (10) • Recycling – electrical waste – new grant and expenditure 30 (30) • Green waste – decrease in disposal costs, lower recycling
credits + increase in annual subscriptions (3) (6) • Lower disposal costs – reduced price and tonnage• Trade waste income – increase in income
(47) (10)
• Trade waste – VAT refund received in 2014/15 rather than2015/16 44
• Flood mitigation – underspend on special works (15) • Flood mitigation – costs recovered less than estimated 55 • Car parks – Garfield Road – closure delayed 8 (30) • Car Parks – delay in opening the Woodlands car park –
September 2016 (10) 100 • Car Parks – increase in pay and display income (18) • On street parking – increase in penalty charge notice income (20) • Yellow Bus service – reduced sponsorship and Section 106
monies partially offset by lower bus hire costs (see para 2.5below). 133
Planning Committee • Development Management Fee Earning – increased income
from Planning Application Fees (150) • Development Management Fee Earning – reduced income
from advice service to the public 20 • Development Control Appeals – Counsel Fees 17 • Local Plan – Consultants’ Fees (9) • Local Plan Costs – delayed until 2016/17 (80) • Building Control – reduced consultancy requirement (15)
Licensing Committee • Alcohol and related licensing – personal licences now valid
indefinitely (7)
Regulatory Committee • Taxi licensing – increase in income (5)
Corporate Management Committee • Corporate Management Business Transformation provision
not required this year (10) • Business rates – costs recovered 6 • Local land charges – grant received (96) • Local land charges – income slow down 20 • Contingencies planning – additional contract costs 5 • Civic Centre – Strategic maintenance deferred (41) • Salary savings from vacancies (106) • Insurance services – risk provision not required (15) • Procurement services – savings from running costs (6) • Computer services – additional Microsoft costs 10 • Customer services - additional staffing costs 133 • Runnymede Web – planned underspend deferred (21) • Runnymede Web – no computer support fee due this year (6) • Energy savings from properties (50) • Vehicle maintenance estimated overspend 124 • Increase in Council insurance premiums 51
Sub-total excluding commercial property (55) (47)
Corporate Management Committee - Commercial property • Corporate property capital – additional staffing costs 150 • Corporate property capital –staffing costs charged to capital (50) • Commercial property capital – additional budget request 33 • Corporate property – business rates on empty properties 60 • Commercial property rental income – variations in rental
income (see para 2.11 below) 475 • Civic Centre – additional parking costs 13
Sub-total for commercial property 206 475
Net increase / (betterment) 151 428
Net variance 579
Yellow buses
2.9. In June 2014 this Committee approved funding for this service as follows: “£200,000 be provided (at current rates) from reserves to subsidise the Yellow School Bus Service during 2015/16”. However, when the budgets were drafted it was anticipated that large contributions would be received from Thorpe Park and other developments in the form of planning tariff income and therefore the additional £200,000 was not included in the budget for this year. Unfortunately following difficulties experienced by the Merlin Entertainments Group over the summer, Thorpe Park have pulled out of sponsoring the buses and it is now unlikely that any planning related income will be received.
2.10 The current MTFS already assumes that the yellow bus service will be completely funded from taxation in the future as we move from planning tariff income to the Community Infrastructure Levy, where contributions cannot be used to fund existing schemes.
2.11 Some of the bigger variations in the budget relate to corporate property and developments. The 2014/15 budget introduced some challenging investment property acquisition targets along with the borrowing costs of the Addlestone One development. Purchases in 2014/15 and early 2015/16 have not been as per budget due to a lack of appropriate properties becoming available on the market (£16m so far earmarked against a budget of £25m).
2.12 This shortfall in available investments has meant that the Council has not needed to borrow to pay for these purchases and therefore interest payments have also reduced. With the timing of borrowings for the Addlestone development also delayed for six months, borrowing costs originally anticipated to be £1.180m in 2015/16 are much lower and are expected to be £0.250m for the year.
2.13 Taking all these factors into consideration, and assuming that no further investment properties are available to purchase during the year, the main variations in the Commercial Services division budgets for this year are estimated to be as follows:
Difference £000
Salaries (net of capitalisation) 100 Other costs 106 Rent / Expected income 475 Costs of Borrowing (930) TOTALS (249)
2.14 The revised MTFS will include an increased salary and external advice costs to more realistic levels. The MTFS always assumed that the cost of regeneration would be a call on the General Fund working balance before income from development schemes came on line.
2.15 The table set out below shows the performance of the council’s key income drivers. Where these are anticipated to vary significantly from the budget, an estimate of the year end effect has been included in Appendix ‘B’ accordingly.
Performance of key income drivers 2015/16 Revised Budget
£000
Profiled Budget
£000
Actual To Date
£000 Halls income 163 105 106 Cemetery income 173 81 139 Community meals 189 94 81 Trade waste income 432 357 374
Off street parking ticket income 524 245 226 Planning Fees 550 275 434 Local land charge search fees 310 173 164 TOTALS 2,341 1,280 1,461
Business Rates and Council Tax Collection
2.16 A significant income stream for the Council is the income from taxation. Collection rates for both business rates and council tax are monitored on a weekly basis by the Corporate Head of Resources. Collection rates for the period (as at 28 August) were as follows:
Collectable debit for the year 52,078 45,291 Cash received to 1 October 2015 34,840 28,733
% of cash received to date – Target 66.90% 63.44% % of cash received to date – Actual 66.90% 63.44% % of cash received - Year End Target 99.00% 99.90%
% of collectable debit written off 0.00% 0.00%
Projected working balances
2.17 Taking account of all factors, the projected use of General Fund working balances for 2015/16 is now expected to be as follows:
Use of General Fund working balance £’000
Planned use of resources (Council February 2015) 1,697 Budget Book Planned Underspends carried forward from 2014/15 646 Para 2.1 Supplementary Estimates approved 836 Para 2.1 Projected year-end budget variances 579 Para 2.8 Lower capital financing costs (930) Para 2.13
Projected contribution from balances in 2015/16 2,828
2.18 The changes highlighted in the above table will reduce the General Fund Working Balance from £9.421m at 1 April 2015 to £6.593m at 31 March 2016. However, on top of this there is Runnymede’s share of the 2014/15 Collection Fund deficit of £2.246m which will be taken from balances in 2016/17. This deficit was mainly due to an increase in the level of provision made for appeals and with £870,000 having been paid out in refunds so far this year, it is looking likely that the full provision will be required. Factoring in this known expense means that the true available working balance at the end of the year will be £4.347m.
3 Housing Revenue Account
3.1 The detailed Housing Revenue Account budget for 2015/16 was approved in February 2015. Since then various changes have occurred to the budgets and updated figures for the current year can be seen in the table below.
3.2 The projected year-end accumulated surplus for the HRA is now expected to be £13.7m an increase of £0.75m over the original budget for the year. (This increase includes the increased balance brought forward at 1 April 2015 of £825k.) The more significant variances, based on comparing the current budget to the forecast outturn, are as follows:
Revised budget to forecast 2015/16 – Significant variances Expend
£000 Income
£000 Housing Repairs budget • Reduction in the estimated costs of the external
decoration programme for 2015/16• Increase in void repairs numbers and costs as
tenants decant to the new Franklands Driveproperties
(30)
30
General Management • Reduced debt charges following the
appropriation of Ashdene & Middlesex Court (1-12) to the General Fund. (date not yet agreed)
Not yet known
Net increase / (betterment) 0 0
4. Capital Expenditure and Receipts
4.1 The detailed Capital budget for 2015/16 was approved in February 2015. Since then various changes have occurred to the budgets and updated figures for the current year can be seen from the table below.
2015/16 £’000
Capital Programme: 40,911 Slippage in Capital schemes carried forward from 2014/15:
• Right-to-buy Mobility Fund (Housing 10 Jun 2015) 60 • Improvements to Victory Park Car Park, Addlestone 50 • Improvements to Food Waste/ Recycling Vehicles 30
Other Changes: • Fernlands open space footpath (funded by s106
income) 21
Revised Capital Programme 53,133
4.2 Appendix ‘C’ summarises capital spend and receipts. For capital expenditure, the Appendix reports the original budget (as per the 2015/16 Budget Book), the current capital budget and a prediction for the year-end outturn.
4.3 The revised Capital Strategy approved by the Council in February 2015 assumed capital receipts of £9.605m in 2015/16. It is now anticipated that in the current year, receipts of £2.528m will be generated.
4.4 The following table sets out the anticipated capital receipts position as at the 31 March 2016 based on the current forecast outturn in capital spend and receipts as set out in Appendix ‘C’:
£’000
Total Capital Receipts at 1 April 2015 2,485
Less set aside for debt repayment (1,032) Usable Capital Receipts at 1 April 1,453
Capital Receipts generated in the Year 2,528 Appendix
‘C’ Less set aside for debt repayment (276) Use of Capital Receipts to Finance Capital Expenditure
(3,705) Appendix ‘C’
Anticipated Usable Capital Receipts at 31 March 2016
-
4.5 The Capital Strategy assumed that all Capital receipts would be used in the year. However, it had also included a sum for the sale of Marshall Place which is now being developed for private sale housing as agreed at this Committee’s last meeting. This means that there will be less capital receipts available in the year and part of the existing programme will need to be funded by other means. Officers are currently working on a revised Capital Strategy to take account of this, along with the changes in the Council’s property acquisitions and developments.
5 Legal Implications
5.1 Section 28 of the Local Government Act 2003 requires authorities to monitor their income and expenditure against their budget, and be ready to take action if overspends or shortfalls in income emerge. If monitoring establishes that the budgetary situation has deteriorated, authorities are required to take such action as they consider necessary. This might include, for instance, action to reduce spending in the rest of the year, or to increase income, or the authority might decide to take no action but to finance the shortfall from reserves.
6 Conclusion
6.1 It was always envisaged that there would be a large use of balances in the current year as the Council’s property investment strategy kicked in.
6.2 Officers are currently in the process of drafting the budgets for 2016/17 and will attempt to claw as much of the predicted deficit back in the current year as possible whilst at the same time ensuring the services remain fit for purpose.
6.3 The Local Government Act 2003 requires the Chief Finance Officer to report on the adequacy of financial reserves when consideration is given to the General Fund budget requirement for the year. The minimum recommended level of unallocated General Fund reserves is based on an assessment of risks and uncertainties and was set at £2.118m for 2015/16. The current prediction of usable working balances at the end of the year (taking into account the 2014/15 Collection Fund deficit) is £4.347m.
6.4 The MTFS planned to use reserves in 2015/16 to progress the Council’s regeneration schemes. The income from the projects would contribute to the General Fund working balance to enable further pump priming work to be
undertaken. The following table shows the predicted movement in balances at the start of the year:
6.5 In the first quarter of 2015/16 a number of supplementary estimates totaling £836,000 have been agreed. In March 2016 some of these items may be classed as capital expenditure e.g. Ashdene and specialist regeneration advice, provided we have a tangible asset to hold them against. It may also be possible to capitalise the cost of Members’ IT depending on the level of Capital Receipts available at the year end.
6.6 Paragraph 2.8 shows the variations known and reported to October 2015; most of these variations are relatively small apart from the sponsorship of Yellow Buses. This will be a full year cost pressure going forward of £200,000 once the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) begins.
6.7 Although the expenses relating to commercial investment have increased paragraph 2.13 shows this is more than offset by the financing costs of the Addlestone and Egham schemes. Both projects will be contributing to the replenishment of the working balance in future years. The costs of borrowing remain low and it is likely further savings can be made in 2016/17.
6.8 Paragraphs 2.15 and 2.16 show our income budgets are on course to achieve their income target and income collection rates for council tax and business rates are performing well.
6.9 Officers are preparing budgets for Members to consider in early January following Government announcements on the finance of local government. At this stage it is anticipated that the Medium Term Financial Strategy will show an increase in the General Fund Working Balance over the next planning period.
This report provides Members with a snapshot of performance/activity across key areas of business in order to aid the decision making process.
The Quarter 2 Corporate Key Performance Indicator results for 2015/16 show that 11 indicators have a green status, six indicators have an amber status, and four have a red status.
After reviewing the results, Officers have planned/introduced a number of follow up actions as described in the report.
MTFS approved February 2015£'000
Use of balances 2015/16 (1,698)Contribution to balances 2016/17 759Contribution to balances 2017/18 918
1.1 The Corporate Key Performance/Activity Indicator set has been established to provide Officers and Members with a regular snapshot of performance/activity across key areas of business in order to aid the decision making process and act as a general ‘health check’.
2. Report
Q2 Results 2015/16
2.1 Appendix ‘D’ shows the Quarter 2 (July-September) results for the Corporate Key Performance/Activity Indicators.
2.2 Indicators with a green status
2.2.1 The following indicators have met or exceeded their annual targets:
Indicator Q2 Target/ estimation
Q2 Actual
Comments/actions
R1: Average number of days taken to process new benefit claims or changes (the result for the days is cumulative as is the total number processed in brackets)
7 7.04 (7354)
Performance on target
LG1: Percentage of FOI requests processed in statutory deadline (with total number of requests in brackets for the actuals)
99% 100% (130)
Optimal performance
LG2: Number of decisions investigated by the ombudsman requiring a remedy (excludes minor injustices)
0 0
Optimal performance
H2: Repairs Satisfaction Survey result. "Were you satisfied with the overall service received?" (with total number in brackets)
98.5% (351)
97.0% (718)
In Q2, 352 respondents told us that they were satisfied with the overall repairs service they had received. Only 11 respondents were not satisfied. However, as this result is still slightly below target, Officers are
investigating the causes of the responses and will recommend further follow up action.
H3: Number of households in B&B accommodation for more than 2 weeks 9 6
Very good performance - maintained below target result since the reprovision of TA and nominations to Franklands Park.
H4: Rent arrears of current tenants as a percentage of annual rent debit (cumulative)
1.39% 1.40%
Arrears often increase in the run up to Christmas and Officers are currently planning measures to highlight the importance of prioritising rent payment, as well as maximising staff resources for arrears collection.
P1: Percentage of major planning applications processed to deadline (with the total number of applications in brackets for the actuals)
60% 80%(5)
Excellent performance
P2: Percentage of minor planning applications processed to deadline (with the total number of applications in brackets for the actuals)
80% 80% (81)
P3: Percentage of other planning applications processed to deadline (with the total number of applications in brackets for the actuals)
85% 86.6 (167)
ES1: Residual household waste per household (kg)
115 114 On target
CD3: Percentage of Careline calls answered within 60 seconds (with total number of calls in brackets for the actuals)
2.3.1 The following indicators slightly missed their annual targets (within 10% of the target):
Indicator Annual target/ estimation
Annual actual
Comments/actions
R2: Percentage of invoices paid in 30 days (with total number in brackets)
98% 95.3% (1521)
Officers believe there are a number of invoices “overdue” that have a valid reason for being late eg not due, in dispute etc but if they are not reported then they are recorded as late. Staff will be emailed to remind them that they should let Finance Officers know of any valid reasons for non-payment.
H5: Percentage of tenants with more than 7 weeks rent arrears
2.6% 2.74%
Arrears often increase in the run up to Christmas and Officers are currently planning measures to highlight the importance of prioritising rent payment, as well as maximising staff resources for arrears collection.
P4: Percentage of appeals determined in accordance with the Council's decision (with the total number of appeals in brackets for the actuals).
80% 50% (10)
The large number and low success rate in this quarter is influenced by the three gypsy site appeal decisions in a single joint inquiry. These decisions represent different approaches by Inspectors in a fast moving national policy situation. The other two unsuccessful decisions were Virginia Water FC which was refused by members against officer advice and an application at the Mission Hall, where the Inspector took a different approach to the NPPF in terms of flood risk.
ES2: Percentage of household waste sent for re-use, recycling and composting 47% 42%
Slightly below target. Work is currently being undertaken on stickering the remaining refuse bins with food waste stickers and door knocking will take place next quarter
ES3: Number of missed bin collection complaints (includes refuse, recycling and food and excludes trade and green waste) 500 628
There has been a number of vehicle breakdowns. Looking at procuring a second hand spare.
CD1: Number of individual trips with Community Transport Services
14,250 13,553 Slightly below target
2.4 Indicators with a red status
2.4.1 The following indicators significantly missed their annual targets (they missed the target by more than 10%):
Indicator Annual target/ estimation
Annual actual
Comments/actions
H1: Average number of days to re-let dwellings
30 42
The average number of days to relet has fallen from 46 in the last quarter to 42 this quarter. A number of changes recommended by the Void Project Group are being made to the processes; and performance is expected to continue to improve.
ES4: Number of street cleansing reports (overflowing litterbins, overflowing dog bins, and general litter/detritus)
150 211
Having reviewed the results over the last 18 months (which ranged from 147-263 per quarter), Officers feel this result represents an average performance with the resources available rather than an underperformance. It is recommended the targets are reviewed for next year unless additional resources can be found for this service through savings elsewhere.
ES6: Number of trade refuse customers
550 528
This period has seen 15 new customers, 8 customers left, 4 increased their bins/ frequency,1 added
recycling [school], and 2 decreased bins / frequency. A review is being commenced, with the assistance of the Council’s Commercial Services team, to identify ways to increase Trade Waste contracts.
CD2: Number of community meals delivered 10,750 9314
Re-launch of service with better service offering, new vehicles etc. scheduled for Q4.
2.5 Follow up action
2.5.1 Managers are aware of the Corporate Key Performance/Activity Indicators under their responsibility and understand that it is part of their role to regularly review their performance and make changes as appropriate (within their authority).
2.5.2 In response to the results, Officers have planned/introduced/are proposing the following actions:
• Staff to be reminded that if they are not paying an invoice within 30 days fora valid reason, then they are to let Finance Officers know.
• Officers to investigate the causes of unsatisfactory responses from theirsurvey results and recommend further follow up action.
• Officers to investigate the cost of procuring a spare second hand refusevehicle to cover breakdowns.
• A review is being commenced, with the assistance of the Council’sCommercial Services team, to identify ways to increase Trade Wastecontracts.
• Community Meals service to be re-launched with additional offers in Q4.
3. Policy framework implications
3.1 The quarterly reporting of Corporate Key Performance Indicators forms part of Runnymede Borough Council’s Performance Management Framework.
4. Resource implications
4.1 Monitoring the CKPIs requires extra Officer time, but there is no additional cost associated with their reporting.
4.2 Currently no remedy action requires additional funding outside approved budgets.
5. Conclusions
5.1 The Quarter 2 Corporate Key Performance Indicator results for 2015/16 show that 11 indicators have a green status, six indicators have an amber status, and four have a red status. After reviewing the results, Officers have planned/introduced a number of follow up actions as described in 2.5.2.
The report sets out the treasury activity for the first six months of the 2015/16 financial year.
Recommendation:
For information.
1. Context of report
1.1 The Council has adopted the CIPFA Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice which requires the Council to approve a treasury management strategy before the start of each financial year, a mid-year report, and an annual report after the end of each financial year. The Council’s Treasury Management Strategy and the Annual Investment Strategy for 2015/16 were considered by the Corporate Management Committee at its meeting on 22 January 2015 and subsequently approved by Full Council on 5 March 2015.
1.2 The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) Guidance on Local Government Investments recommends that local authorities amend their investment strategies in light of changing internal or external circumstances.
1.3 This report is being considered by the Overview and Scrutiny Select Committee at its meeting on 3 December 2015. The comments of that Committee will be reported to this meeting.
2. Report
Treasury Management Strategy
2.1 The Council’s stated investment strategy is to manage counterparty risk as the top priority. The Corporate Head of Resources is pleased to report that all treasury management activity undertaken during the period complied with the CIPFA Code of Practice, and the relevant legislative provisions.
2.2 There were two departures from the Council’s approved investments strategy during the period in that investments exceeding £5m were placed with the Government’s Debt Management Office (DMO) which is in contravention to paragraph 16 of the strategy “No investment with any one provider/organisation will exceed £5m in total”, and paragraph 17 “No one individual term deposit to exceed £2.5m in total”.
2.3 These departures were necessary in order to ensure investments matured on certain days to pay for the first instalment of the Addlestone One development (£13m) and the investment in the Egham Town Centre properties (£8m). These departures were all placed with the DMO - representing the lowest risk to the Council - because all the Council’s call accounts were full and there is currently no market for 1 to 2 month money.
2.4 All future payments in relation to the Addlestone One development are at manageable sizes, and this breach should not occur again. There is no need to amend the Treasury Strategy at this time.
2.5 The Council’s treasury advisor, Capita Asset Services, has provided the following economic update.
2.6 UK GDP growth rates in 2013 of 2.2% and 2.9% in 2014 were the strongest growth rates of any G7 country; the 2014 growth rate was also the strongest UK rate since 2006 and the 2015 growth rate is likely to be a leading rate in the G7 again, possibly being equal to that of the US. However, quarter 1 of 2015 was weak at +0.4% though there was a rebound in quarter 2 to +0.7%. Growth is expected to weaken marginally to about +0.5% in quarter 3 as the economy faces headwinds for exporters from the appreciation of Sterling against the Euro and weak growth in the EU, China and emerging markets, plus the dampening effect of the Government’s continuing austerity programme, although the pace of reductions was eased in the May Budget.
2.7 Despite these headwinds, the Bank of England is forecasting growth to remain around 2.4 – 2.8% over the next three years, driven mainly by strong consumer demand as the squeeze on the disposable incomes of consumers has been reversed by a recovery in wage inflation at the same time that CPI inflation has fallen to, or near to, zero over the last quarter. Investment expenditure is also expected to support growth.
2.8 The August Bank of England Inflation Report forecast was notably subdued with inflation barely getting back up to the 2% target within the 2-3 year time horizon. However, with the price of oil taking a fresh downward direction and Iran expected to soon rejoin the world oil market after the impending lifting of sanctions, there could be several more months of low inflation still to come, especially as world commodity prices have generally been depressed by the Chinese economic downturn.
2.9 There are therefore considerable risks around whether inflation will rise in the near future as strongly as previously expected; this will make it more difficult for the central banks of both the US and the UK to raise rates as soon as had previously been expected, especially given the recent major concerns around the slowdown in Chinese growth, the knock on impact on the earnings of emerging countries from falling oil and commodity prices, and the volatility we have seen in equity and bond markets in 2015 so far, which could potentially spill over to impact the real economies rather than just financial markets.
2.10 The American economy has made a strong comeback after a weak first quarter’s growth at +0.6% (annualised), to grow by no less than 3.9% in quarter 2 of 2015. While there had been confident expectations during the summer that the Fed could start increasing rates at its meeting on 17 September, or if not by the end of 2015, the recent downbeat news about Chinese and Japanese growth and the knock on impact on emerging countries that are major suppliers of commodities, was cited as the main reason for the Fed’s decision to pull back from making that start. This has led to a reappraisal of the likelihood of any increase occurring in 2015 with early 2016 now being widely regarded as being more likely.
2.11 In the Eurozone, the ECB in January 2015 unleashed a massive €1.1 trillion programme of quantitative easing to buy up high credit quality Government and other debt of selected EZ countries. This programme of €60bn of monthly purchases started in March 2015 and it is intended to run initially to September 2016. This already appears to have had a positive effect in helping a recovery in consumer and business confidence and a start to a significant improvement in economic growth. GDP growth rose to 0.5% in quarter 1 2015 but came in at +0.4% in quarter 2 and looks as if it may maintain this pace in quarter 3. However, the recent downbeat Chinese and Japanese news has raised questions as to whether the ECB will need
to boost its QE programme if it is to succeed in significantly improving growth in the EZ and getting inflation up from the current level of around zero to its target of 2%.
Outlook for Interest Rates
2.12 The Council’s treasury advisor, Capita Asset Services, has provided the following forecast:
2.13 Capita Asset Services undertook a review of its interest rate forecasts on 11 August. Later in August, fears around the slowdown in China and Japan caused major volatility in equities and bonds and sparked a flight from equities into safe havens like gilts and so caused PWLB rates to fall. However, there is much volatility in rates as news ebbs and flows in negative or positive ways and news in September in respect of Volkswagen, and other corporates, has compounded downward pressure on equity prices. This latest forecast includes a first increase in Bank Rate in quarter 2 of 2016.
2.14 Despite market turbulence in late August, and then September, causing a sharp downturn in PWLB rates, the overall trend in the longer term will be for gilt yields and PWLB rates to rise, due to the high volume of gilt issuance in the UK, and of bond issuance in other major western countries. Increasing investor confidence in eventual world economic recovery is also likely to compound this effect as recovery will encourage investors to switch from bonds to equities.
2.15 The overall balance of risks to economic recovery in the UK is currently evenly balanced. Only time will tell just how long this current period of strong economic growth will last; it also remains exposed to vulnerabilities in a number of key areas.
Investment Activity
2.16 In accordance with the Code, it is the Council’s priority to ensure security of capital and liquidity, and to obtain an appropriate level of return which is consistent with the Council’s risk appetite. It is a very difficult investment market in terms of earning the level of interest rates commonly seen in previous decades as rates are very low and in line with the 0.5% Bank Rate. The continuing potential for a re-emergence of a Eurozone sovereign debt crisis, and its impact on banks, prompts a low risk and short term strategy. Given this risk environment, investment returns are likely to remain low.
2.17 Investment Activity during the first six months of the year can be seen from the table on the next page :
Banking Sector 5,000 18,000 5,000 18,000 Building Societies Local Authorities CCLA Property Fund
11,500 1,000 2,000
18,500 --
18,500 1,000
-
11,500 -
2,000 Money Market Funds (MMF)
6,430 43,170 38,250 11,350
Enhanced MMF 5,000 - - 5,000 UK Government
(DMO/T-Bills) Funding Circle
- 400
23,500 -
16,000 -
7,500 400
31,330 103,170 78,750 55,750
2.18 A full list of investments held at the 30 September is set out at Appendix ‘E’.
2.19 Investment activity during the first six months has predominantly been in short term call accounts and Money Market Funds due to the uncertainty surrounding the timing of the first payment in relation to the Addlestone One development and other proposed property purchases.
2.20 The balance of £55.75m held at the 30 September reduced significantly shortly after that date. Large payments were made in early October including, in particular, the first payment of the Addlestone One development on 1 October (£13m), the purchase of property in Egham on 6 October (£8m), the precept to Surrey County Council and Surrey Police on 16 October (£5m) and the payment of net business rates to the Government and Surrey County Council (£0.3m) on 19 October.
2.21 Due to the continuation of depressed investment earnings, the Council has over recent years increased the range of investments it can invest in, both to generate higher returns and also to add additional counterparties with which to invest. The Council’s investment in longer duration investment vehicles once again proved beneficial during the first six months of the year. As with all longer term investments, this performance cannot be guaranteed into the future. The performance of the longer duration funds during 2015/16 has been as follows:
Performance of longer duration investments Amount Invested
£’000
% (net of fees)
Enhanced Money Market Funds: • Insight Investments Liquidity Plus fund 2,000 0.392
• Payden Sterling Reserve Fund 1,000 0.280
• Aberdeen Investment Cash Fund 2,000 0.460 Property Funds: • CCLA Property Fund 2,000 4.78
Funding Circle: • 388 Businesses lent to as at 30 September 400 7.20
2.22 The Council was required to borrow £103.292 million at the end of 2011/12 for the start of the housing self-financing regime. Having explored a range of different options, the Council borrowed all of the required money from the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB).
2.23 Following the agreement to invest in property assets at a special meeting of full Council held on 18 November 2014, the Council has begun embarking on a series of borrowings in order to finance several property investments along with the Addlestone One development.
2.24 Borrowing Activity during the first six months of the year can be seen from the table below:
Investment Sector Outstanding at 1 April
2015
New Borrowing
Borrowing Repaid
Outstanding at 30 Sept
2015 £000 £000 £000 £000
PWLB 103,292 15,000 - 118,292 Oxfordshire County Council
5,000 - - 5,000
108,292 15,000 - 123,292
2.25 A full list of borrowings held at the 30 September is set out at Appendix ‘F’.
2.26 The £15m new borrowing undertaken in August was for the impending first payment of the Addlestone One development. It was undertaken swiftly following a sharp drop in PWLB rates following concerns in the Asian market and rates of 1.97% for 5 years (£5m) and 2.56% for 10 years (£10m) were locked into. For comparative purposes, the PWLB certainty rates for 1 April 2015 to 30th September 2015 were as follows:
1 Year 5 Year 10 Year 25 Year 50 Year
Low 1.11% 1.82% 2.40% 3.06% 3.01%
Date 02/04/2015 02/04/2015 02/04/2015 02/04/2015 02/04/2015
High 1.35% 2.35% 3.06% 3.66% 3.58%
Date 05/08/2015 14/07/2015 14/07/2015 02/07/2015 14/07/2015
Average 1.26% 2.12% 2.76% 3.39% 3.29%
Investment income and debt interest
2.27 The 2015/16 estimate for investment income and debt interest split between the General Fund and Housing Revenue Account (HRA) was as follows:
Gross external investment income 297 129 426 Interest paid on deposits and other balances (1) - (1) Net Investment Income 296 129 425 Debt Interest (1,180) (3,458) (4,638) Net Investment Income / (Debt interest) (884) (3,329) (4,213)
2.28 Aside from the parameters set in the Annual Investment Strategy, the main factors that determine the amount of investment income gained by the Council are the level of interest rates, cash flow and the level of reserves and balances. The impact of capital cash flows – receipts from sales, and timing of capital projects – also has a significant impact on cash flows.
2.29 Investment rates available in the market have been broadly stable during the first half of the year and have continued at historically low levels as a result of the ultra-low Bank Rate and other extraordinary measures such as the Funding for Lending Scheme.
2.30 The original estimate for investment income for 2015/16 was based on the Council achieving an average interest rate of 1.10%. This took into account a base rate of 0.5% through to September 2015 increasing to 1.0% in quarter 4. The latest forecasts for interest rates are that the rate will not start to rise until quarter 2 of 2016.
2.31 The delay in the increase in bank base rate and the requirement to keep a lot of the Council’s funds available for acquisitions and development payments by placing them in short term (low paying) investment vehicles means that the expected average interest rate for the year has dropped considerably. The revised estimate for investment income and debt interest for the current year is now estimated to be as follows:
General Fund £’000
HRA £’000
Total £’000
Gross external investment income 217 93 310 Interest paid on deposits and other balances (1) - (1) Net Investment Income 216 93 309 Debt Interest (460) (3,448) (3,908) Management Expenses (32) - (32) Net Investment Income / (Debt interest) (276) (3,355) (3,631)
3. Treasury Management Indicators
3.1 The CIPFA Code on Treasury Management requires the Council to approve a set of treasury management indicators by which the Council can measure its exposure to risk. The Council’s treasury indicators were approved by Council on 5 March 2015 and the progress to date is set out in the following paragraphs.
3.2 This indicator is set to control the Council’s net exposure (taking borrowings and investments together) to interest rate risk. The upper limits proposed on fixed and variable rate interest rate exposures, expressed as the principal sums outstanding are:
Upper limits proposed on fixed and variable rate interest rate exposures expressed as the principal sums outstanding in respect of borrowing
Target £’000
Actual £’000
Met?
Upper limit on fixed interest rate exposures
155,482 118,292 Yes
Upper limit on variable interest rate exposures
0 0 Yes
3.3 Fixed rate investments and borrowings are those where the rate of interest is fixed for the whole financial year. Instruments that mature during the financial year are classed as variable rate. If it is not clear whether an instrument should be treated as fixed or variable rate, then it is treated as variable rate.
3.4 The variable rate upper limit of zero means that the Council is minimising its exposure to uncertain future interest rates on its debt. As all the Council’s investments mature within the year they are classed as variable the Council has no variable rate borrowings to offset these against, hence the negative figure in the table above.
Maturity structure of borrowing
3.5 This indicator is set to control the Council’s exposure to refinancing risk. The upper limits on the maturity structure of fixed rate borrowing were set at their maximum because at the time the proposals for taking on the housing debt had not been finalised and it was therefore important to maintain this flexibility to allow the optimum debt structure to be put in place.
Proposed upper and lower limits on the maturity structure of fixed rate borrowing
Upper Lower Actual Met? Under 12 months 25% 0% 0% Yes 12 months and within 24 months 25% 0% 0% Yes 24 months and within five years 25% 0% 4% Yes Five years and within 10 years 50% 0% 3% Yes 10 years and above 100% 0% 93% Yes
3.6 Time periods start on the first day of each financial year. The maturity date of borrowing is the earliest date on which the lender can demand repayment.
Principal sums invested for periods longer than 364 days
3.7 The purpose of this indicator is to control the Council’s exposure to the risk of incurring losses by seeking early repayment of its investments. The proposed limits on the total principal sum invested to final maturities beyond the period end are as follows:
Principal sums invested for periods longer than 364 days Target £’000
Actual £’000
Met?
Limit on principal invested beyond one year 1,000 0 Yes
Borrowing limits
3.8 As part of the Prudential Indicators report approved by Council on 5 March 2015, the following borrowing limits were approved:
Borrowing Limits Target £’000
Actual £’000
Met?
Approved Authorised Limit 155,482 128,292 Yes
Approved Operational Boundary 152,482 125,292 Yes
3.9 The Authorised Limit is a limit on the maximum amount the authority expects to borrow at any one point in time. The limit includes short-term borrowing. The Operational Boundary is the term used to describe the most likely scenario of cash flow movements and equates to the maximum level of external debt projected by the authority’s estimates. The Authorised Limit differs in that it provides over and above the operational boundary for unusual cash movements (hence, one is a limit, the other a boundary).
4. Legal Implications
4.1 The powers for a local authority to borrow and invest are governed by the Local Government Act 2003 and associated Regulations. A local authority may borrow or invest for any purpose relevant to its functions, under any enactment, or for the purpose of the prudent management of its financial affairs. The Regulations also specify that authorities should have regard to the CIPFA Treasury Management Code when carrying out their treasury management functions.
4.2 Section 15 of the Local Government Act 2003 provides the power for the Government to issue guidance about investments to which authorities are to have regard. This report takes account of the current and proposed guidance issued by the Government.
4.3 The Government has issued Regulations to require investment in share capital to be treated as capital expenditure. The Government state that this acts as a disincentive to local authorities to make such investments, as they would consume the authority’s capital resources. However, the Government has excluded investments in money market funds, multilateral development banks and real estate investment trusts (REITs) from this definition, as it has no wish to deter authorities from considering these investments.
To recommend the acquisition of an e billing package as part of the Council’s transformation and modernisation agenda.
Recommendation :
£20,000 be released from the existing budget of £100,000 for IT upgrades to fund the e billing package.
1. Context of report
1.1 As part of a continued drive to expand the ways we communicate and improve the service we provide to residents, there is an opportunity to enhance the tax collection systems in the Resources Business Unit to include an e billing module.
2. Report
2.1 The Council currently uses a citizens account system which will be developed over the next 18 months as we develop customer services. In February 2015 Officers trialled sending the council tax leaflet electronically and providing paper copies on request. Very few hard copies have been required with the full leaflet being available to download on the Councils website.
2.2 A package to enable e billing is available for a year one cost of £20,000. This includes the first year maintenance and support costs. The ongoing cost will be £4,000 a year which can be met from ongoing savings. As the Council runs a full Northgate billing and collection system provided by Northgate it would not be possible to use a different package from another supplier.
2.3 The table on the next page shows the total number of bills produced and those taxpayers who pay by direct debit. While this is very much a proxy ratio for those residents who would take up e billing it is hoped council tax payers and businesses will find e billing helpful.
2.4 On business rates the percentage has been applied to the total number of bills rather than those who use direct debits – the financial regulations of most organisations do not allow direct debits to be taken from their bank accounts for a number of reasons.
2.5 It has been estimated that the cost of a bill (paper, printing, envelope and postage) is around 80p. The saving in staff time has not been included as this will not reduce staff costs, but will make an efficiency saving as set out in the table on the next page.
2.6 E billing will need to publicised alongside the citizens account to facilitate residents engaging electronically with the Council. However, the payback period could be around 18 months with an ongoing reduction in finance overheads.
2.7 Residents who wish to receive paper bills posted will continue to receive paper bills in February each year.
2.8 E billing will have most benefit by introducing the system for the February billing. In early 2016 Finance Officers will market the system to Council tax payers by e mail etc to encourage take up. During the year we do re-issue council tax and business rates bills following a change in circumstances, change in ownership etc.
3. IT Strategy
3.1 As part of the development of the Council’s IT strategy, the Business Development Member Working Group meets regularly to consider new schemes. This report has been circulated to all of the Working Group members and discussed in detail with the Chairman (Councillor Meares). Over the next few months there is a much wider IT strategy to come before Members following the move of Customer Services into the Resources division. This includes the citizens account and enabling residents to self serve on robust systems. Devolution and shared services may present opportunities for the way we deliver the service to our residents including revisiting provision of our major financial systems.
3.2 The revised IT strategy will include the resources available – staff, revenue costs, and the impact on the capital programme.
4. Policy framework implications
4.1 The proposal is a continuation of the Councils efficiency agenda and improvement of services to the public.
5. Resource implications
5.1 The capital programme contains a budget of £100,000 of which £30,000 has been committed. This spend, if approved, can be contained in the overall budget provision. The potential revenue savings will be monitored and reported back to Members in both channel shift and the budget monitoring reports. If take up is high the investment can be repaid in two financial years.
6. Conclusions
5.1 The Committee is recommended to agree to the release of £20,000 from the IT upgrade budget of £100,000 to acquire the e billing package.
To receive and adopt the Minutes of the Property Sub-Committee meeting held on 30September 2015 (at Appendix ‘G’). The Sub-Committee’s recommendations wereconsidered by this Committee at its last meeting.
(To resolve)
Background Papers
None
11. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
OFFICERS' RECOMMENDATION that –
the press and public be excluded from the meeting during discussion of the following reports under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that the reports in question would be likely to involve disclosure of exempt information of the description specified in paragraphs 1 and 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
(To resolve)
PART II
Matters involving Exempt or Confidential information in respect of which reports have not been made available for public inspection
Paras a) Exempt Information
12. COUNCIL OFFICER REORGANISATION 1 and 3
13. UPDATE ON PROGRESS OF LONGCROSS JUDICIAL REVIEW 3
14. ADDLESTONE ONE – PURCHASE OF THE CAR PARKING MANAGEMENTSYSTEM 3
A MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 29 OCTOBER 2015 1
B GENERAL FUND FINANCIAL MONITORING STATEMENT – APRIL TO SEPTEMBER 2015
10
C CAPITAL INCOME AND EXPENDITURE STATEMENT – APRIL TO SEPTEMBER 2015
11
D CORPORATE KEY PERFORMANCE/ACTIVITY INDICATORS – QUARTER 2 – 2015/16
14
E INVESTMENTS HELD AT 30 SEPTEMBER 2015 15
F BORROWINGS AT 30 SEPTEMBER 2015 16
G PROPERTY SUB-COMMITTEE MINUTES – 30 SEPTEMBER 2015
17
X:\Wpcmin\LAW AND GOVERNANCE BUSINESS CENTRE AGENDA REPORTS\APPENDIX\Corporate Management Comm\2015\12\Appendices 081215.Docx
RBC CM 29.10.15
Runnymede Borough Council
CORPORATE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
29 October 2015 at 7.30. p.m.
Members of the Committee present: Councillors P I Roberts (Chairman), Ms C M Simmons (Vice-Chairman), J M
Edwards, Mrs E Gill, Mrs L M Gillham, Miss M N Heath, Mrs G M Kingerley, H W V Meares, P B Tuley and P J Waddell
Members of the Committee absent: None
310. FIRE PRECAUTIONS
The Chairman read out the Fire Precautions.
311. NOTIFICATION OF CHANGE TO COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
The Group mentioned below had notified the Chief Executive of its wish that the change listed below would be made to the membership of the Committee. The change was for a fixed period ending on the day after the meeting and thereafter the Councillor removed would be reappointed.
Group Remove From Membership Appoint Instead
Runnymede Independent Residents’
Councillor A Alderson Councillor Mrs E Gill
The Chief Executive had given effect to this request in accordance with Section 16(2) of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989.
312. MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 24 September 2015 were confirmed and signed as a correct record.
313. DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS
Councillor Ms C M Simmons and Councillor P J Waddell declared a pecuniary interest in item 6 on the agenda on Fees and Charges as they rented a garage from the Council and they left the room for the consideration of this item.
Councillor H W V Meares declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 12 on the agenda on Egham Gateway Development Phase One – Proposed Acquisitions because of past business relationships with one of the owners of the properties that the Council was proposing to acquire. He left the room for the consideration of this item.
314. FEES AND CHARGES
The Committee considered the proposed fees and charges for the Corporate Management Committee for the next financial year as set out at Appendix ‘A’ to the agenda. The current fees and charges had been agreed a year ago at Corporate Management Committee in October 2014. As the Land Charges Account was in surplus it was agreed that fees and charges for this area be reduced. It was also agreed that the Council Tax and Business Rates court costs would not be increased, as these charges were already amongst the highest in the County. Officers had recommended that fees for garage rents be not
- -
APPENDIX 'A'
1
RBC CM 29.10.15
increased as some garages had proved difficult to let and an increase might result in more voids. It was expected by Officers that welfare benefit changes would have an impact on this budget. The Committee noted that the Planning Committee had decided that some of the garages should be demolished. Garages were not provided automatically as part of Housing tenancies.
The Committee agreed not to change the fees for garage rents at this stage but asked Officers to submit a report to a future meeting on garage rents to provide the Committee with information so that it could decide whether there was a case for increasing garage rental fees in the future. The Committee expressed the view that the amount that the Council charged for garage rentals was very reasonable compared to other providers. However, the size of the garages that the Council offered was not large and it was difficult to fit larger modern cars in them and this might reduce the number of customers who were prepared to pay higher fees. The report should contain analysis of the pattern of voids including whether they were concentrated in particular areas and a breakdown of the number of voids occurring in the garage rentals included with a house and in the private rentals. The report should also outline the conditions attached to the rentals, for example, whether the storage of dangerous materials was prohibited.
RESOLVED that –
the proposed fees and charges, as reported at Appendix ‘A’ to the agenda, be approved to be effective from the dates specified, or as soon as practical thereafter.
315. CALENDAR OF MEETINGS 2016 – 2017
The Committee considered the proposed Calendar of Meetings for the Municipal Year May 2016 – May 2017.
The schedule of meetings largely followed the usual well established pattern. The opportunity had been taken to schedule meetings of Overview and Scrutiny Select Committee and Crime and Disorder Committee on the same evening as they had the same membership and the volume of business should be able to be accommodated. The Chairman of those Committees had also indicated his support for this. Where permanent changes were made to the calendar of meetings during a Municipal Year, such as the permanent addition of an extra meeting of a committee, the Constitution currently required that Full Council approve it. For ease of administration, the Committee agreed to recommend that in future the Chief Executive be given delegated authority to make such changes in consultation with the respective Leaders of the political groups and the Constitution be amended accordingly. The full Calendar of Meetings would still continue to be submitted for approval.
The Committee wished to avoid meetings of Corporate Management Committee and Full Council taking place in the same week. It therefore recommended that the Calendar of Meetings 2016/17 be adopted as set out at Appendices ‘B’ and ‘C’ to the agenda, subject to Corporate Management Committee being moved from Tuesday 18 October 2016 to Thursday 13 October 2016, Corporate Management Committee being moved from Wednesday 14 December 2016 to Thursday 15 December 2016 and Full Council being moved from Thursday 15 December 2016 to Thursday 8 December 2016. These changes are all included on the Calendar of Meetings for May 2016 – May 2017 as set out in Appendix ‘A’ attached. For ease of reference, a diary schedule of this revised Calendar of Meetings is also attached at Appendix ‘B’.
It was also agreed that Group Leaders would be consulted on moving the Corporate Management Committee meeting in December 2015 so that it would not meet in the same week as Full Council.
2
RBC CM 29.10.15
RECOMMEND that –
i) the Calendar of Meetings for May 2016 – May 2017, as set out inAppendices 'A' and ‘B’ be approved; and
ii) any ad hoc minor changes to the calendar of meetings for the currentand future Municipal Years be delegated to the Chief Executive, inconsultation with Group Leaders, and the Constitution be amendedaccordingly.
316 MARSHALL PLACE, MARLEY CLOSE AND PALMER CRESCENT: DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
By resolution of the Committee, the press and public were excluded from the meeting during the consideration of this matter under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that the discussion would be likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information of the description specified in paragraphs 1 and 3 of Schedule 12A to Part 1 of the Act.
The Committee received a report reviewing the position on the open space sites at Marshall Place, Marley Close and Palmer Crescent, taking into account analysis by the Council’s appointed surveyors and evaluation by the Council’s Commercial Services Team. The background history and characteristics of all three sites were noted. The three sites had been reviewed by the Property Sub-Committee at its meeting on 30 September 2015.
The Council had agreed the disposal of Marshall Place open space to a developer subject to adjacent land at Moated Farm becoming accessible from Marshall Place and prepared for recreation. The Property Sub-Committee had been informed that the developer had not progressed the purchase of the land and Officers now considered that it would be more appropriate for the Council to develop the site in line with the Council’s Property Investment Strategy. The Council’s appointed surveyor had evaluated four options - affordable rent, private rent, private sale and disposal of the land (with planning consent). The Committee noted the analysis which showed that the return from development of the site for private sale housing would allow the Council to maximise its income and generate income for future investment. The Sub- Committee had supported the development of Marshall Place for private sale housing and the appointment of consultants as reported to provide consultancy services to develop the detailed scheme and the Corporate Management Committee concurred with those proposals.
As part of the agreement to develop Marshall Place, the adjacent amenity space had been opened up and access provided for local residents. Following consultation, Corporate Management Committee in 2013 had agreed the items to be provided in the recreational area at Moated Farm. However, progress on these works had been delayed because of lack of capital resources and staffing shortages. The work would be reactivated and the play provision funded from the proceeds of the development. The Committee agreed that Officers should seek to provide the items for this recreational area as soon as possible.
The financial implications for the capital programme associated with the development of Marshall Place for private sale were noted by the Corporate Management Committee. The Property Sub-Committee had agreed that Officers would clarify the composition of the development budget in the business case to be reported to Corporate Management Committee. The Corporate Management Committee noted details of the development budget provided by Officers as amended as reported to the meeting which included provision for the play area. The Corporate Management Committee approved a prudent development budget as set out in the report which included provision for contingencies and
3
RBC CM 29.10.15
agreed that this budget be added to the approved capital programme. This prudent development budget would be repaid from the sale of the housing units.
The next meeting of full Council was not until 17 December 2015. As it was necessary for the Marshall Place development to proceed without delay, the Committee agreed to determine resolutions i), ii) and iii) below without reference to Full Council.
The Council had made its original decisions in 2012 to dispose of open space sites at Palmer Crescent and Marley Close as it needed to raise capital receipts to strengthen its budget position. Since that time the Council’s Commercial Services Officers had made substantial progress in developing both additional capital value from sites but also generating additional rent income by the investment of capital to create revenue now and as the sites under development materialised. These gains had reduced the pressure on the Council to seek to maximise the value of all land, especially where there was an opportunity to retain amenity space for the enjoyment of local residents. Therefore the Property Sub-Committee had reviewed the Council’s position on these two sites in view of this changed context.
The Council’s Commercial Services Officers had reviewed the Council’s previous decisions to dispose of the open spaces at Palmer Crescent and Marley Close to developers and was investigating other options of the Council retaining these sites for future potential development at a later stage in line with the Property Investment Strategy whilst maintaining the amenity for the local residents in the interim. The developers had been informed that the Council no longer wished to sell the sites. The Council’s appointed surveyors had evaluated four further options for the Palmer Crescent site - affordable rent, private rent, private sale and disposal of the land (with planning consent). The Committee noted a summary of the Council’s appointed surveyor’s analysis.
A review of the Open Space Study was currently taking place which would update Officers’ understanding of amenity space usage and need in the borough. This was being undertaken concurrently with a review of Council policies (local plan, housing strategies and sub-regional discussions) in respect of housing delivery. This flux in policy would support the ‘wait and see’ approach of not progressing disposal of Palmer Crescent or Marley Close at this time.
Considering the aims of the Property Investment Strategy and taking account of the Council’s appointed surveyors’ analysis and current flux in policy, Officers had recommended that the Palmer Crescent open space site be retained for use as amenity space. The Property Sub-Committee had concurred with that approach. The Corporate Management Committee was mindful of the representations that had been made previously by a number of residents in the locality of Palmer Crescent seeking retention of the site as amenity space and agreed that the Palmer Crescent site be not sold or developed for housing or other uses at this time.
The Council’s appointed surveyors had evaluated four options for Marley Close as a stand-alone site - affordable rent, private rent, private sale and disposal of the land (with planning consent). The Committee noted the summary analysis which included an assessment of the redevelopment possibilities of the adjacent Council owned Ledger Drive site, which was situated on Housing Revenue Account land. Any future proposals in respect of Ledger Drive therefore would need to be submitted to the Housing Committee in addition to the Corporate Management Committee. Officers recommended retention of the site adjacent to Marley Close as amenity space, but suggested that the redevelopment potential of land off Ledger Drive, comprising the premises as reported, be investigated. The Property Sub-Committee had concurred with that approach. The Corporate Management Committee was mindful of the representations that been made previously by a number of residents in the locality of Marley Close seeking retention of the site as amenity space and agreed that the Marley Close site be not sold or developed for housing or other uses at this time.
4
RBC CM 29.10.15
The Property Sub-Committee had recommended that further investigation and appraisal of the adjacent Ledger Drive site should be undertaken and that a business case, including indicative costings and cost /benefit analysis of the development should be submitted initially to the Sub –Committee, with further reports on the Ledger Drive site to be made subsequently, if appropriate, to the Housing Committee and the Corporate Management Committee, prior to public consultation. The Corporate Management Committee supported this recommendation.
RESOLVED that -
i) the Marshall Place site be developed with dwellings for private sale;
ii) a development budget for the Marshall Place site be agreed in the sumreported and this budget be added to the approved capital programme;
iii) consultants as reported be appointed at a total cost as reported plusVAT to develop detailed proposals for development of the MarshallPlace site including the appointment of construction contractor, thesupervision of the contract and then the appointment of both theCouncil’s Employers Agent and CDM Principal Designer;
iv) in view of the need to proceed without delay, resolutions i), ii) and iii)above be determined under paragraph 1.3 of CommitteeResponsibilities in the Council’s Constitution;
v) the sites at Marley Close and Palmer Crescent be not sold ordeveloped for housing or other uses at this time; and
vi) the land off Ledger Drive, comprising the premises as reported, besubject to further consideration for redevelopment and a business caseincluding indicative costings and cost/benefit analysis ofredevelopment be brought to Property Sub-Committee prior to reportsto both Housing Committee and Corporate Management Committee andprior to public consultation.
317. PRINTING CONTRACT EXTENSION
By resolution of the Committee, the press and public were excluded from the meeting during the consideration of this matter under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that the discussion would be likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information of the description specified in paragraphs 1 and 3 of Schedule 12A to Part 1 of the Act.
The Committee considered an extension of the existing printing contract with an external contractor, Blue Mushroom, for Minutes and Agendas and other work. The contract would expire on 31 January 2016.
The Committee noted that the amount of printed agendas and minutes produced by Blue Mushroom had reduced over the last ten years with a consequent cost saving which would continue as there was a greater move to electronic transmission.
Taking into account the excellent service provided by Blue Mushroom in terms of cost, timeliness and quality, the Committee agreed that it was premature to retender the print contract in order to allow time for the new IT equipment arrangements for Members to be established and subsequent to that, to fully ascertain Members' preference for hard copy or electronic agendas. The law required that Councillors positively chose to receive electronic
5
RBC CM 29.10.15
agenda by signing an appropriate proforma. This exercise had been carried out in June 2015 but had evoked a small response. Officers would repeat the exercise once the new IT equipment had been fully rolled out and installed when Members would be better placed to indicate their wishes. This was vital as it would dictate hard copy print numbers upon which the print contract would be retendered and retendering for potentially lower, but as yet unquantifiable, volumes might increase prices as the current prices were based on economies of scale. It was difficult at this stage to be precise in the tender specification about the print quantities that the Council would need until the new IT arrangements for Members had settled down. Apart from Members’ requirements, it would still be necessary to produce some hard copies for the public and press.
The Committee agreed that the print contract should be extended for 12 months on the existing terms which included a clause that the contract could be terminated at any time by either party giving not less than six months notice in writing to the other party, and that the contract be retendered, if appropriate, at the expiry of that period. The Committee suggested that at the next time when the contract was tendered, social value should form a part of the tender evaluation.
In view of the substantial arguments for retaining the services of Blue Mushroom for a further period of 12 months, the Committee agreed to waive Standing Order C2.1, which would normally require a tendering exercise to be undertaken before awarding the contract.
RESOLVED that –
Standing Order C2.1 be waived for the reasons set out above and the Corporate Head of Law and Governance be authorised to agree terms for an extension of the existing print contract with Blue Mushroom for a period of 12 months, and the contract be retendered, if appropriate, at the expiry of that period.
318. URGENT ACTION – STANDING ORDER 42
By resolution of the Committee, the press and public were excluded from the meeting during the consideration of this matter under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that the discussion would be likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information of the description specified in paragraphs 1 and 3 of Schedule 12A to Part 1 of the Act.
The Committee noted the following action taken after consultation with the Chairman of the Committee under Standing Order 42.
Officer Action Central Index No
Head of Commercial Services Approving the terms of an agreement for lease and the lease with the cinema for the Addlestone ONE development.
853
Head of Commercial Services Appointing specialist project management consultancy services to progress the redevelopment of Ashdene House
854
6
RBC CM 29.10.15
Copies of proformas 853 and 854 detailing this action taken after consultation with the Chairman of the Committee under the Standing Order 42 procedure were noted as set out at Exempt Appendix '3' to the Agenda.
319. EGHAM GATEWAY DEVELOPMENT PHASE ONE – PROPOSED ACQUISITIONS
By resolution of the Committee, the press and public were excluded from the meeting during the consideration of this matter under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that the discussion would be likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information of the description specified in paragraphs 1 and 3 of Schedule 12A to Part 1 of the Act.
The Committee considered the proposed acquisition of two separate properties in a road in Egham, an initial development budget for one of the properties and whether to agree in principle pursuing compulsory purchase action as necessary to secure the future development of parts of the road.
The Council was developing a growing portfolio of successful regeneration projects, which were designed to enhance the quality, diversity and place shaping of Runnymede’s town centres.
When approaching Egham town centre by car or from the railway station there was no obvious “gateway” to encourage visitors and residents into the Town Centre from either Church Road or Station Road. One of the purposes of the Egham Gateway development was to provide such a gateway. Master planning work that the Council had commissioned stated that to progress regeneration of the Egham Gateway site some land assembly would be required. Corporate Management Committee on 28 May 2015 had agreed to proceed with the development of Egham Gateway as part of a broader Runnymede Regeneration Programme. The Committee had supported the inclusion of further property in Egham in order to achieve the land assembly for the development.
Officers had made substantial progress with the development of the OJEU Procurement Process for the Egham Gateway Development and would shortly be ready to issue the Notices to commence procurement. The procurement documents had been created and in parallel, in order to further strengthen the impact of the development, further land assembly negotiations had been actively pursued. The Committee received details of an opportunity to acquire two separate properties in a road in Egham with two different owners.
The first property referred to in resolution i) below, was a listed building in need of substantial refurbishment and improvement to make it available for modern use. A structural and building condition survey had been undertaken. The property currently generated no income and had an empty property National Non Domestic Rate liability which was noted. However, there was the potential for future income generation from commercial units and residential accommodation. As the property was a Listed Building, in putting forward any development the Council was required to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building and its setting as a heritage asset within the Borough. When operating in a commercial marketplace the time required to undertake surveying, design, costing and an investment appraisal to inform the acquisition of the property in the context of the required work on a Listed Building and Planning Consent would result in the sale being lost in this case as the owners were seeking a rapid sale. The Committee agreed that the purchase of the property in advance of this work was justified because of the place shaping opportunity created and an indication of the type of residential scheme that could be developed was noted by the Committee. A costed scheme for redevelopment would be submitted for the consideration of the Committee once Listed Building Consent and Planning Permission had been obtained. The Committee agreed that an initial budget in the sum reported be allocated to fund all the necessary preparatory work to initially secure
7
RBC CM 29.10.15
Listed Building Consent and planning permission for commercial units and residential accommodation. This budget would be capitalised against the asset on completion.
The other property which it was proposed to acquire in the road in Egham was currently available for commercial and office purposes. The estimated rental value and the passing rent (i.e. the rent currently being obtained) of this other property were noted.
The purpose of acquiring both properties was to secure additional land that would substantially improve the place shaping opportunity created by redevelopment but also add capital and revenue value to the development. In order to optimise these benefits, provided that the acquisitions of the two properties were completed, it would be desirable for the land currently forming the road between the two properties to be included in the development. The Committee noted a summary of the further investigation that would be undertaken to seek to identify the ownership of the land and the steps that would be taken to seek to acquire the land for the Council for the development. If the Council was unable to acquire the land by any other means then, as a last resort, compulsory purchase powers could be used if it was decided that that the acquisition of the land was in the public interest. If it was necessary for the Council to exercise its compulsory purchase powers a report recommending a resolution to authorise a Compulsory Purchase Order would be brought back to the Committee, after planning permission had been secured. The Committee agreed in principle that compulsory purchase powers be used as necessary to acquire the land.
The estimated yield on the combined purchase of the two properties net of interest was noted. The acquisition of these properties met the criteria set out in the Council’s Property Investment Strategy apart from the minimum rental yield return. In this case the Committee agreed that the acquisition was justified because it was considered that the place shaping benefit, the strategic location of both of the properties and the potential income generation opportunity from an enlarged site that would result from the acquisition overrode the Property Investment Strategy minimum rental yield return criterion. The total cost of acquiring the two properties including Stamp Duty Land Tax and fees was noted. Different scenarios of interest costs depending on various costs of capital were noted. The cost could be funded in part from rental income secured from the property referred to at resolution iv) below. The capital programme approved by Members could contain the acquisition of these two properties.
Provided that the acquisitions of the properties referred to at resolutions i) and iv) below were completed, it was agreed that the property referred to at resolution iv) below and an area as reported of the property referred to at resolution i) below be made available for redevelopment as part of the Egham Gateway Phase 1 Regeneration Project. Any new residential accommodation would be let on a long-term lease to the Council’s Special Purpose Vehicle, RBC Investments (Surrey) Limited and any commercial units would be retained by the Council.
A Section 123 Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) valuation had been obtained to support the cost of the acquisition to ensure that it was agreed at best consideration for the Council. The Committee agreed that these acquisitions would provide the Council with a further opportunity to assemble strategic regeneration sites that through redevelopment and refurbishment would add further to the regeneration of Egham Town Centre. Furthermore, in addition to existing rental income being used to fund the cost of capital, a redevelopment of the site would provide for both improved capital value and further significant revenue income to the Council through commercial and residential lettings.
The next meeting of Full Council was not until 17 December 2015. As both of the owners were seeking a rapid sale it was necessary for the decisions set out below to be taken before then and therefore the Committee agreed to determine these matters without reference to Full Council.
8
RBC CM 29.10.15
RESOLVED that –
i) the freehold purchase of the listed building property in the road inEgham as reported be acquired for the sum reported plus legal andprofessional fees up to the sum reported and Stamp Duty Land Tax inthe sum reported, resulting in a total as reported;
ii) Officers bring back to the Corporate Management Committee aproposed scheme for the refurbishment of the property referred to atresolution i) above that will return the property back into use ascommercial units and residential accommodation;
iii) an initial development budget be allocated in the sum reported tosupport the preparatory work required to prepare a listed buildingconsent and planning application for the refurbishment and potentialredevelopment of the property referred to at resolution i) above;
iv) the freehold purchase of another property in the road in Egham asreported be acquired for the sum reported plus Stamp Duty Land Tax inthe sum reported, resulting in a total as reported;
v) provided that the acquisitions at resolutions i) and iv) above arecompleted, it be agreed in principle that compulsory purchase powersbe used as necessary to secure the ownership and use of an area ofland currently forming the road between the property referred to atresolution i) above and the property referred to at resolution iv) above,subject to a further report once planning permission for theredevelopment of the road as part of the comprehensive developmentof adjacent land in the Council’s ownership has been secured;
vi) provided that the acquisitions referred to resolutions i) and iv) aboveare completed, the property referred to at resolution iv) above and anarea of the property referred to at resolution i) above as reported bemade available for redevelopment as part of the Egham Gateway Phase1 Regeneration Project; and
vii) in view of the need to proceed without delay, these matters bedetermined under paragraph 1.3 of Committee Responsibilities in theCouncil’s Constitution.
Chairman
(The meeting ended at 8.20 p.m.)
9
General Fund Financial Monitoring Statement April 2015 to September 2015
Service Area Original Current Profiled Actual to Budget Budget Budget Date
Corporate and Business Services 1 '161 2,099 1,309 1,798
Planning Committee 1,436 1,514 645 533
Licensing Committee 46 46 46 29
Regulatory Committee 38 38 17 (9)
Net expenditure on services 10,884 12,365 14,392 14,626
Accounting adjustments
Reversal of depreciation charges (2,056) (2,056)
Cost of capital charge to HRA (43) (43)
Revenue contributions to capital expenditure 175 175
Transfer to/(from) reseves
Transfer from Insurance reserve (50) (50)
Treasury and financing:
Investment income (296) (296)
Capital financing costs 1 '180 1,180
Minimum Revenue Provision 200 200
Government Grants (Non service specific)
New Homes Bonus (1 ,504) (1 ,504)
Other Grants (15) (15)
Net General Fund Expenditure 8,475 9,956
Contribution to I (Use of) Working Balance (1 ,698) (3, 179)
Budget Requirement 6,777 6,777 Revenue Support Grant (1,279) (1 ,279)
Business rates retention (2,289) (2,289)
Transfer to/from Collection Fund:
Share of Council Tax surplus for prior years (122) (122)
Share of Business Rates surplus for prior ye~ 1,550 1,550
Council Tax Demand 4,637 4,637
Housing Committee Note
APPENDIX '8'
· Forecast Forecast, Outturn to Budg('}tj
£000 £000
2,006 (90)
(381) 0
4,480 (18)
2,692 237
2,778 679
1,297 (217)
39 (7)
33 (5)
12,944 579
(2,056) 0
(43) 0
175 0
(50) 0
(296) 0
250 (930)
200 0
(1 ,504) 0
(15) 0
9,605 (351)
(2,828) 351
6,777 0 (1,279) 0
(2,289) 0
(122) 0
1,550 0
4,637 0
During the year the Council pays out around £14.6m in housing rent allowances to private sector tenants. This works out at approximately £1.2m per month. This expenditure is coded directly to the Housing Committee expenditure codes. The subsidy that the Council receives (about £22m in 2015/16) is held in a central control account until the end of the year when all of the year end costs are available and the annual subsidy reconciliation is carried out. At this time, the Council establishes the appropriate sums for the subsidy receivable for council tax and rent rebate benefits and allocates them accordingly.
The budget has been profiled to take account of these factors and therefore the profiled budget column above increases beyond the annual budget by approximately £1.2m each month to mirror the expected pattern of the expenditure. The year end profile then returns to the original budget in anticipation of the allocation of the subsidy receipt.
As the year progresses it appears that the Council's housing costs increase
C:\Users~ohn.gurmin\AppData\Locai\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\33VKK8ZD\06 Monitoring Report- Annex 1 -version 2GF Sum 15-16
Capital Income and Expenditure
Monthly Monitoring Statement April 2015- September 2015
Grants to RSLs: Remaining Provision for New Schemes 300,000 478,730 100,000 478,730 Budget c/fwd from 2014/15
Purchase of HRA Properties 1,300,000 1,300,000 771,271 1,300,000 Housing Committee- June 2014 Right-to-Buy Social Mobility Fund 0 60,000 0 60,000 Housing Committee- June 2015
1,707,975 1,946,705 919,581 1,953,306
Community Services Committee
Older People Services ~ Community Transport Vehicle Replacements 0 286,720 286,784 286,784 Budget c/fwd from 2014/15
Grant Aid
Capital Grant Aid 20,000 38,000 3,498 38,000 £18,000 Commited from 2014/15
Leisure Services
Marshall Place Open Space 0 82,150 0 82,150 Budget c/fwd from 2014/15
Fernlands- Footpath 0 21,000 0 21,000
Car Parks
Improvements to Victory Park Car Park 0 50,000 55,420 55,420 S042 -April 2015
Lyne & Chilsey Green Flood Risk Scheme 430,000 582,950 0 50,000 Budget c/fwd from 2014/15
C:\Users~ohn.gurmin\AppData\Locai\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\33VKK8ZD\06 Monitoring Report- Annex 2 M06 2015-16 Capital
Capital Income and Expenditure
Monthly Monitoring Statement April 2015- September 2015
Share Purchase 0 10,000 10,000 10,000 CMC- May 2015
38,118,000 49,392,900 1,344,177 38,389,600
Total Capital Expenditure 40,910,975 53,132,805 2,805,078 41,613,887
CAPITAL RECEIPTS
HRA Receipts (860,000) (860,000) (1,362,685) (1,333,500)
C:\Users~ohn.gurmin\AppData\Locai\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\33VKK8ZD\06 Monitoring Report- Annex 2 M06 2015-16 Capital
-w
Capital Income and Expenditure
Monthly Monitoring Statement April 2015 - September 2015
General Fund Receipts
Total Capital Receipts
METHOD OF FINANCING
Direct Revenue Contributions:
Hardware Computer Replacement
Safer Runnymede CC1V Equipment
5106 Monies
HRA Balances
Government Grants:
Environment Agency: Flood Defence Grant
Prudential Borrowing
Addlestone ONE
Corporate Properties
Internal Borrowing
Other Grants and Contributions
Planning Tariff
Capital Resources
Capital Receipts
Total Capital Expenditure Funding
2015/16 Current
Budget Book Budget
£ £ {1,454,500) {1,454,500)
(2,314,500) (2,314,500)
75,000
100,000
0
910,000
430,000
22,633,000
15,000,000
0
250,000
1,512,975
40,910,975
Actual Forecast I COMMENTS
Activity Outturn
£ £ {1,194,189) {1,194,189)
(2,556,874) (2,527,689)
75,000
100,000
29,747
910,000
50,000
17,782,360
7,530,100
11,182,000
250,000
3,704,680
41,613,887
C:\Users\john.gurmin\AppData\Locai\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\33VKK8ZD\06 Monitoring Report- Annex 2 M06 2015-16 Capital
+
Cornomt ,. K"Y p .. rtqrronnc,./Act!y!ty IOdlqtom 2Q 1511§
procc!:ccdln
R2: Pcrccnt:Jgool lnvolcC~~po:~ldln30
do:~y!l(wjth totol
numbcrlnbr:Jckcl ll)
LG1:Pcrccnbgcol FOircquc:tll
procD!lt:cd lnot;~h.tofY
dc:~dllno('Nithtctill
numbcrolrcquet:toln brockctoforthc
octuolc)
Ht : Avor.lgonumbcr
PMvi;~CB
Mlvi;~CHo
Mlvi:~SO
o!d;~yctom-lct JMvi:~MW
dwctllngo
H2: Rcp:Jif1l S:~tbf:~c~onSur.ey rccult."""'./1/creyou ~tlcflcdwlththo I JMvi.:JMW ovcr::~nocrvlco
rcecivcd7'(tot:JI nvmbcrlnbr:Jckct:~)
H3: Numbcrof hou:;chold11lnBt.B aceommodo:~tlon for
more than:!~
H4: Rcnt:mc:uoof currcnttcn:~l"\lll:lll:l
pcrccntagoof3Mu.:JI rcntdcbit(cumul:~tlvc)
o:~ppllc:~tlonllln
br:Jckataforthc OC!U:llll)
P2:Percent:~goof
m\norplnnnlng
todondllne(wlththc tot:~ l numbcrol
:~pp llc:ll.lonnln
br.~ckotlllortho
act~ Ill)
tot:~J numbcrof
appllco:~tlontlln
br:~ckct:~forthc
3C\1J;1Jtl)
P4: Pcrccnl3goof :~ppc:~l tl dctcrmlnod In :Jcccrdanccwiththc CounclrGdcch::lon
{.,..;ththc tot:!.lnumbcr ol:~ppdo lnbrackcb
lorlhoactu:llll).
JMvi:~MW
JMvi:~MW
JMvbMW
IM
1M
1M
1M
ESt :RDIIIdu:Jl hoU":~chold~topcr I IMvi:~CK
houochold(kg)
ES2:Percont:~gcof
hou:;choldw:lGIDIICnl !orrcH~t~C,rccyr;flng
:.ndcompo::tlng
ES3: Number of mlllllcdbll"lcolloetlon compi:J!ntG(Includct~
rcl~o.rccyr; llngand
lood andcxcludcll
ES6: N~..mboroftr.1dc rchr.:ocurotomDfll
COt: Nl.nlberof lndlvidu:tl tripllwl\h
CommurityTran!lport Service
C02: Number of
IMvlaCK
IMvi:~CK
IMvi:~CK
IMvi:~JK
IMvi:~CK
JMvtarYW
commurity mo:~lll I JM vii! rYW delivered
CD3: Pcrccnt.:l;col Carcllncco:~\1!1
oncwcrcdwithln60 IICCOndll(.,..;thtot:ll I JMVI3LB numbcrolco:~U!III"I
bellovothero:JrllanumboroflfliiOICCC"overduo·th:~t h:wcavo\ldrcn!lon lorbclngl:ltoognotduc,lndlnpi.Jit!Otcbut ll thoyaronotrcportcd thcl"\thoyaro recorded 011 1.:1\o Stnfl win bo cmaHod to remind thorn tho:~\ they nhculd let Flnonco Otflccrt know of .:11"\Y vnlld rOOllloflll for non-poymont
numbcrofdoyn torc- lcth:llllo llcnfrom461nthclolltquorterto -12 1h'D A number of cho:~ngcs rocommondcd by tho Void Project Group :~rc bolng
to tho proc:ona., nnd pcrlormanco 111 Cllpocted to continue to Improve
11"102,352reopondentlllo!duathotthcywcronll•f~w,ththoovorallrepnlrll thcly h:ld roec1vocl Only 1 1 relpondcn\1 wcro net utllllod Howovor 1tt
:.ppoal doclalona Ina alnglcjolntlnquuy. Thc:~edccl~lof111 rcprD!Icnt ppf03C.holl by lntpoc\Ofl In 3 !11.1\ moving n.:IIIOntll policy IIIU.:IUOn Tho
lather two Ufl!luccc .. ful doeftllona were Vlrgtnla Water FC Whrch wn1 roluacd by :;~g:alnltofflccradvtcoand:;~napphco:~tlonatthcMtlslonH:~II where thO took a dt!fcrent approoch to the NPPF In tcrmo of flood 111k
bclowtar11at. Workl\curr<'ntlybulnGund<-rlilk<'nDn\tJCk<'rlnllthcrrorn~lnlna: tim wtth tood waste ~ ticker\ and door k1101.klnc wlllt~k .. plltl! nell\ IIUIIt,.,. wlth
500502 - HRA Financing Settlement 3,292 10 28 Mar2022 2.40%
500495 - HRA Financing Settlement 10,000 15 28 Mar 2027 3.01%
500498 - HRA Financing Settlement 10,000 20 29 Mar 1932 3.32%
500500 - HRA Financing Settlement 10,000' 20 29 Mar 1932 3.32%
500501 - HRA Financing Settlement 10,000 20 29 Mar 1932 3.32%
500493 - HRA Financing Settlement 10,000 25 27 Mar 1937 3.44%
500496 - HRA Financing Settlement 10,000 25 27 Mar 1937 3.44%
500503 - HRA Financing Settlement 10,000 25 27 Mar 1937 3.44%
500494 - HRA Financing Settlement 10,000' 30 28 Mar 1942 3.50%
500497 - HRA Financing Settlement 10,000 30 28 Mar 1942 3.50%
500499 - HRA Financing Settlement 10,000 30 28 Mar 1942 3.50%
504311 - AddlestoneONE 5,000 5 17 Aug 2020 1.97%
504312- AddlestoneONE 10,000 10 17 Aug 2025 2.56%
Total PWLB 118,292 96%
Other Oxfordshire CC - lm.estment Properties 5,000' 3 09 Feb 2018 1.30%
Total Local Authorities 5,000 4%
Total Borrowings 123,292'
£'000 Borrowing Maturity Profile at 30 September 2015 35000
30000
"C 25000 Q)
3: 0 .... 20000 .... 0
CQ ... c 15000 :1 0 E <( 10000
5000
0 I h
Allocation of Borrowings
Housing Re~.enue Account
General Fund -Appropriated Assets
General Fund -Addles tone One De~.elopment
General Fund - Proiperty ln~.estment Strategy
102,892
400 i
15,000
5,000.
123,292.
APPENDIX 'G'
Runnymede Borough Council
PROPERTY SUB-COMMITTEE
30 September 2015 at 7.30 p.m.
Members of the Sub-Committee present:
Councillors P I Roberts (Chairman), H W V Meares (Vice-Chairman), A Alderson, J M Edwards and Ms C Simmons
Members of the Sub-Committee absent: Councillor Miss M N Heath
ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN
RESOLVED that -
Councillor PI Roberts be elected Chairman for the Municipal Year 2015/16.
ELECTION OF VICE-CHAIRMAN
RESOLVED that -
Councillor H W V Meares be elected Vice-Chairman for the Municipal Year 2015/16.
FIRE PRECAUTIONS
The Chairman read out the Fire Precautions.
NOTIFICATION OF CHANGES TO SUB-COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
The Group mentioned below had notified the Chief Executive of its wish that the change listed below would be made to the membership of the Sub-Committee. The change was for a fixed period ending on the day after the meeting and thereafter the Councillor removed would be reappointed.
Group Remove From Membership Appoint Instead
Conservative Councillor P J Waddell Councillor J M Edwards
The Chief Executive had given effect to this request in accordance with Section 16(2) of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting of the Sub-Committee held on 7 April 2015 were confirmed and signed as a correct record.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Miss M N Heath.
MARSHALL PLACE, MARLEY CLOSE & PALMER CRESCENT: REVIEW OF SITES
The Committee reviewed the position on these three open space sites, taking into account analysis by the Council's appointed surveyors as reported and evaluation by the Council's Commercial Services Team. The background history and characteristics of all three sites was noted.
A press release on all three sites would be issued after consideration of this Sub- Committee's recommendations by Corporate Management Committee on 29 October.
~7
RBC PS 30.09.15
Marshall Place Open Space:
In 2012, the Council had agreed the disposal to a developer of Marshall Place open space subject to adjacent land at Moated Farm becoming accessible from Marshall Place and prepared for recreation.
As part of the agreement to develop this land, the adjacent amenity space had been opened up and access provided for local residents. Following consultation, Corporate Management Committee in 2013 had agreed the items to be provided in the recreational area at Moated Farm. However, progress on these works had been delayed for staffing reasons. The work would be reactivated and the play provision funded from the proceeds of the development.
Members were informed that the developer had not progressed the purchase of the land, and Officers now considered that it would be more appropriate for the Council to develop the site in line with the approved Property Investment Strategy.
The Council's appointed surveyor had evaluated four options in February 2015, affordable rent, private rent, private sale and disposal of the land (with planning consent). The Committee noted the analysis. From the analysis, the return from development of the site for private sale would allow the Council to maximise its income and generate income for future investment.
The Sub- Committee supported the development of Marshall Place for private sale and the appointment of consultants as reported to provide consultancy services to develop the detailed scheme.
The financial implications for the Capital Programme associated with the proposed redevelopment of Marshall Place were noted and Officers would clarify the composition of the development budget in the business case to be reported to Corporate Management Committee.
The Sub - Committee then considered the approach on open space sites at Palmer Crescent and Marley Close. The Council had made its original decisions in 2012 to dispose of these open spaces as it needed to raise capital receipts to strengthen its budget position. Since that time the Council's Commercial Services officers had made substantial progress in developing both additional capital value from sites but also generating additional rent income by the investment of capital to create revenue, now and as the sites under development materialised. These gains had reduced the pressure on the Council to seek to maximise the value of all land, especially where there was an opportunity to retain amenity space for the enjoyment of local residents. In view of the changed context, the Sub-Committee reviewed the Council's position on the two sites as follows:
Palmer Crescent Open Space
The Council's Commercial Team had reviewed the Council's previous decision to dispose of the open space at Palmer Crescent to a developer and was investigating other options of the Council retaining the site for future potential development at a later stage in line with the Property Investment Strategy whilst maintaining the amenity for the local residents in the interim. The developer had been informed the Council no longer wished to sell the site.
The Council's appointed surveyors had also evaluated four further options for the site in February 2015,namely affordable rent, private rent, private sale and disposal of the land (with planning consent). The Committee noted the Council's appointed surveyors analysis.
A review of the Open Space Study was currently taking place which would update Officers' understanding of amenity space usage and need in the borough. This was being undertaken concurrently with a review of Council policies (local plan, housing strategies and sub-regional discussions) in respect of housing delivery. This flux in policy would support the 'wait and see' approach of not progressing disposal of Palmer Crescent at this time.
Considering the aims of the Property Investment Strategy, taking account of the Council's appointed surveyor's analysis and current flux in policy, Officers recommended that the site be retained to give the Council options for use as amenity space. Members endorsed this approach.
Marley Close Open Space
RBC PS 30.09.15
The Council's Commercial Team had reviewed the Council's previous decision to dispose of the site to a developer and had investigated other options of the Council retaining the site for future potential development at a later stage in line with the Property Investment Strategy whilst maintaining the amenity for the local residents in the interim.
The Council's appointed surveyors had again evaluated four options for Marley Close as a standalone site in February 2015, affordable rent, private rent, private sale and disposal of the land (with planning consent). The Committee noted the summary analysis.
From the analysis, the Marley Close site could be redeveloped but its viability would improve if linked with the development of the adjacent council owned Ledger Drive site which had redevelopment potential. Therefore, Officers recommended retention of the site adjacent to Marley Close as amenity space, but suggested that the redevelopment potential of Ledger Drive be investigated. The Marley Close amenity space could then be shared by any future development of the Ledger Drive site.
The developer had been informed that the Council no longer wished to sell the site.
As with Palmer Crescent, the current flux in policy also supported not progressing disposal of the Marley Close site at this time.
Members supported the approach on Marley Close and recommended further investigation and appraisal of the adjacent Ledger Drive site. If Corporate Management Committee agreed in principle to this further investigation, a business case, including indicative castings and cost /benefit analysis of the development would be brought to this Sub -Committee. Reports thereon, if appropriate, would subsequently then be made to Housing and Corporate Management Committees.
RECOMMEND that:
Corporate Management Committee be informed of the Sub- Committee's views as follows:-
i) the Marshall Place site be developed by the Council with dwellings for sale;
ii) the appointment of consultants as specified be agreed at a total cost as reported plus VAT to develop detailed proposals for development of the scheme to appointment of developer and the supervision of the contract and then both the Council's Employers Agent and COM Principal Designer;
iii) an appropriate development budget be included in the capital programme and clarification of the composition of the budget be included in the business case;
iv) the sites known as Marley Close and Palmer Crescent be not sold or developed for housing at this time; and
v) subject to agreement, in principle, by Corporate Management Committee, the land off Ledger Drive comprising the premises as reported be subject to further consideration for redevelopment and a business case including indicative costings and cost/benefit analysis of redevelopment be brought to Property Sub- Committee prior to reports to both Housing Committee and Corporate Management Committee, and prior to public consultation.
