Agenda item

This item is scheduled for consideration at the meeting of the Executive scheduled to be held on 22 February 2021. The agenda for this meeting of Council was published prior to the meeting of the Executive, so a copy of the report and appendices scheduled for consideration at the meeting on 22 February 2021 is attached.

 

Councillor Ric Metcalfe, Leader of the Council, proposed the recommendations contained within the report in relation to the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2021-2026 and budget.

 

He reflected on the events of the previous year and its humanitarian impact, with 123,000 deaths in the United Kingdom attributable to Covid-19, 1,500 of those cases being in Lincolnshire. In addition to this, a significant number of individuals, families and businesses had been severely impacted by the virus which had in some cases left them losing everything. He felt it was important, therefore, that in making reference to the plight of the Council’s finances that it be set in that wider sobering context.

 

Covid-19, combined with a number of measures that the Council had to undertake due to the restrictions imposed at different times throughout the last twelve months, had led to significant costs and a dramatic drop in many traditional sources of income for the Council. Councillor Metcalfe reported that it did take some time to convince the Government that additional support was necessary to effectively prevent many Councils across the country from going bankrupt. The City Council was very well financially managed and due to its excellent financial stewardship had been able to stabilise the position and rebuild its finances for a sustainable future in line with continuing to support the Council’s vision. Councillor Metcalfe took this opportunity, however, to remind Council that there were lots of financial challenges ahead and further difficult decisions to be made.

 

Councillor Metcalfe made reference to a recent report which had been published and documented the excellent way in which the Council had responded to Covid-19 and how existing services and the establishment of new services had performed as part of addressing the significant challenges presented. He praised the Chief Executive, her team and the whole Council workforce, together with all members of the Council, for their part in this outstanding response and said that everyone should be very proud. Councillor Metcalfe added that this was a reminder of how this Council and other district authorities across the country knew their local communities.

 

Councillor Donald Nannestad, Deputy Leader of the Council, seconded the proposition and reiterated the points made in relation to the Covid-19 pandemic, adding that the last twelve months had been the most challenging in living memory. However, he was of the opinion that the Council had risen to the challenge and highlighted the following aspects of the Council’s response to the pandemic as outstanding examples of work:

 

·         the establishment of the new befriending service;

·         the provision of financial assistance to housing tenants;

·         the partnership approach to provision of Covid-19 testing centres;

·         the allocation of business support grant funding;

·         the continuation of waste collection services throughout the pandemic;

·         the continuation of building new council homes.

 

The next step for the Council would be to focus on recovery and he wanted the city to be in the best possible position for when restrictions were lifted in accordance with the Government’s plans.

 

The Mayor, having received notice of the Leader of the Opposition’s intention to propose a number of amendments, permitted that more than one amendment may be discussed and debated at once to facilitate the proper and efficient conduct of the Council’s business in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 17.6(b). She reported, however, that each amendment would be voted upon separately.

 

Councillor Thomas Dyer, Leader of the Opposition, took the opportunity to thank the Council’s finance team for their work over the last year and echoed Councillor Metcalfe’s remarks in respect of the challenging year the Council had faced during the Covid-19 pandemic. He added that the City Council had been negatively impacted by the pandemic, particularly in relation to key income streams such as car parking revenue. Councillor Dyer therefore called for a more diversified investment plan together with a variety of income streams and said that further investment, especially local investment, should never be written off.

 

Councillor Dyer, on behalf of the Conservative Group, added his thanks to the Chief Executive and all Council staff for their work in response to the pandemic, stating that local government had been critical. He also took this opportunity to praise the superb efficiency with which the City Council facilitated payment of grant funding to businesses and thanked all staff concerned. Councillor Dyer agreed that local authorities knew their communities better than anyone, with local knowledge and local decision making being key. This, in his opinion, stated a strong case for further devolution deals with the Government and local government reorganisation in Lincolnshire.

 

In terms of the Medium Term Financial Strategy, Councillor Dyer was of the opinion that the car parking strategy would be key, particularly in the context of supporting the city’s high street businesses alongside the Government’s roadmap to recovery. He proposed the following amendments to the Medium Term Financial Strategy, which were seconded by Councillor Christopher Reid, Deputy Leader of the Opposition:

 

Amendment 1 – the increasing of Enforcement Fines:

 

(a)  Littering - Amendment to page 117 of the agenda pack. Appendix A. Delete £75 proposed fine for littering and insert £100.

(b)  Dog Fouling – Amendment to page 117 of the agenda pack. Appendix A. Delete £50 proposed fine for Dog Fouling and insert £100.

(c)  Breach of Community Protection – Amendment to page 117 of the agenda pack. Appendix A. Delete £75 proposed fine for Breaching of Community Protection and insert £100.

(d)  Breach of a Public Space Protection Order – Amendment to page 117 of the agenda pack. Appendix A. Delete £75 proposed fine for Breach of a Public Space Protection Order and insert £100.

(e)  Breach of S46 Notice (Presentation of Waste) – Amendment to page 117 of the agenda pack. Appendix A. Delete £75 proposed fine for Breach of S46 Notice (Presentation of Waste) and insert £100.

 

Amendment 2 – freeze all parking charges until undertaking a full car parking review:

 

Delete all proposed charges for 21/22 and insert all current rates on pages 132, 133 & 134 of the council agenda pack.

 

Amendment 3 – introduce one hours free parking at the Lincoln Central Car Park until the outcome of the parking review:

 

Delete charges for one hour parking at the Lincoln Central Car Park on page 131 of the council agenda pack and replace with “£0 until outcome of parking review”.

 

Amendment 4 – freeze the rent for all City of Lincoln Council managed office spaces for the 21/22 financial year:

 

Insert a new line on page 31 of the council agenda pack. Following 13.1 which will read “13.2 The Full Council determines that all managed office space rents will be frozen for the 21/22 financial year”.

 

Amendment 5 – the Council notes that freezing the remuneration of all staff earning over £30,000 for the financial year 21/22 would save £121,000:

 

Insert a new line on page 31 of the council agenda pack. Following 13.1 (or 13.2 if amendment 4 is approved) which will read “13.2(or13.3) The Council notes that freezing the remuneration of all staff earning over £30,000 for the financial year 21/22 would save £121,000”.

 

Amendment 6 – the Council to establish a “City of Lincoln Big Clean” similar to a successful scheme in South Kesteven, funded via the Vision 2025 reserve:

 

Insert within 6.2 on page 28 of the council agenda pack following the heritage action zone scheme “City of Lincoln Big Clean - £200,000pa”.

 

Amendment 7 – introduce a Plastic Free discount for Christmas Market Stall Holders:

 

Insert within page 143, appendix A of the council agenda pack within the “Craft/Fairtrade Discount” section add the words “/Plastic Free” following “Fairtrade” so the line will read “Craft/Fairtrade/Plastic Free Discount”.

 

Councillor Reid, in seconding the amendments, felt that they represented improvements to the Medium Term Financial Strategy and strongly agreed that enforcement fines should be increased in line with other fees and charges, together with Council Tax, in order that they acted as a deterrent and had a proper impact. In respect of car parking, he welcomed the car parking review but was of the view that it would be premature to impose further costs on people at the current time by increasing fees and charges in this respect, advocating a scheme of one hour of free car parking in the Central Car Park which he and his group had been pushing for some time to help incentivise people to visit the city. He felt that this proposal seemed even more appropriate for introduction alongside the Government’s roadmap.

 

Reflecting on the amendment in respect of the Council’s managed office spaces, Councillor Reid said that the Council needed to provide support to these business in anyway it could, with a potential increase in rents not being something they needed at the current time. He also commended the work of South Kesteven District Council in its ‘Big Clean’ scheme and welcomed the opportunity for the City Council to introduce a similar scheme. With regard to the amendment regarding a plastic free discount for stall holders at the Christmas Market, he was of the opinion that this could be introduced easily alongside discounts for Fairtrade and, in supporting the green agenda, felt that this should be put in place.

 

Councillor Metcalfe, as a right of reply, responded to Councillor Dyer’s point in respect of investment stating that the City Council at an early stage had sought to make a number of commercial investments in order to provide a greater financial sustainable future. He added that, unfortunately, the Government had made changes to the prudential code which made it more difficult for local authorities to work in a more entrepreneurial way but committed that the Council would continue to seek further opportunities.

 

Regarding local government reform, Councillor Metcalfe reported that he had a long held aspiration for a Greater Lincoln Council reflective of an area the current City Council actually served. He cited car parking as an example whereby 75% of users were people from outside of the city boundary yet did not have any democratic say on how these services should be managed. The City Council therefore provided services, such as car parking, to a much larger proportion of people who it received Council Tax for with this being a clear example of democratic deficit.

 

Councillor Metcalfe made reference to climate change and an assertion that the Council had made limited investment in this agenda. He reminded Council of the devotion he personally contributed to the subject of climate change as Leader of the Council, the fact that he chaired the Lincoln Climate Commission and that the Council had very recently added a Climate Change Manager to its establishment to drive the agenda forward.

 

In respect of each amendment, as proposed, Councillor Metcalfe made the following comments:

 

·         Amendment 1 – enforcement fines were not meant to be sources of income and were intended as a deterrent and were reviewed on an annual basis. The proposed increase would be insignificant and would not solve the Council’s financial problems;

·         Amendments 2 and 3 – the Council was already supporting businesses in a very significant way in utilising its new discretion to support recovery locally. Loss of income, particularly from car parks, had been a major factor in near bankruptcy for the Council. Car parking charges had been relaxed at various points throughout the pandemic, quite rightly, but income from car parks was a vital revenue stream for the Council to provide much needed public services. To cut car parking charges would only benefit a small number of people at the expense of wider Council Tax payers in Lincoln;

·         Amendment 4 – the Council had been extremely helpful and offered support to all businesses within its managed workspaces during the pandemic, with a number of schemes coming forward by way of further support;

·         Amendment 5 – the Council would not depart from nationally agreed pay schemes;

·         Amendment 6 – the Council already maintained good standards of cleaning in the city centre. The proposal to introduce a ‘Big Clean’ scheme and costs it would incur offered no merit at all;

·         Amendment 7 – insufficient notice of the amendment had been received in order for necessary advice to be taken to give this due consideration but, in principle, the suggestion was good and would be explored further.

 

Having been proposed and seconded, each amendment was voted upon individually. In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 19.7, a recorded vote was taken for each amendment, the results of which were as follows:

 

Amendment 1:

 

For	Against	Abstention
Councillor Briggs	Councillor Bean
Councillor Dyer	Councillor Bilton
Councillor Hills	Councillor C Burke
Councillor Mara	Councillor S Burke
Councillor Reid	Councillor B Bushell
Councillor Spratt	Councillor L Bushell
Councillor Strengiel	Councillor Ellis
	Councillor Hewson
	Councillor J Kirk
	Councillor R Kirk
	Councillor Loffhagen
	Councillor Longbottom
	Councillor Mair
	Councillor McNulty
	Councillor Metcalfe
	Councillor Murray
	Councillor Nannestad
	Councillor Preston
	Councillor Tweddle
	Councillor Vaughan
	Councillor Woolley

 

Due to problems associated with connectivity, Councillor Toofany could not be heard to ascertain which way he wished to vote for this amendment and was therefore unable to participate. His vote was therefore not recorded.

 

Amendment 2:

 

For	Against	Abstention
Councillor Briggs	Councillor Bean
Councillor Dyer	Councillor Bilton
Councillor Hills	Councillor C Burke
Councillor Mara	Councillor S Burke
Councillor Reid	Councillor B Bushell
Councillor Spratt	Councillor L Bushell
Councillor Strengiel	Councillor Ellis
	Councillor Hewson
	Councillor J Kirk
	Councillor R Kirk
	Councillor Loffhagen
	Councillor Longbottom
	Councillor Mair
	Councillor McNulty
	Councillor Metcalfe
	Councillor Murray
	Councillor Nannestad
	Councillor Preston
	Councillor Toofany
	Councillor Tweddle
	Councillor Vaughan
	Councillor Woolley

 

Amendment 3:

 

For	Against	Abstention
Councillor Briggs	Councillor Bean
Councillor Dyer	Councillor Bilton
Councillor Hills	Councillor C Burke
Councillor Mara	Councillor S Burke
Councillor Reid	Councillor B Bushell
Councillor Spratt	Councillor L Bushell
Councillor Strengiel	Councillor Ellis
	Councillor Hewson
	Councillor J Kirk
	Councillor R Kirk
	Councillor Loffhagen
	Councillor Longbottom
	Councillor Mair
	Councillor McNulty
	Councillor Metcalfe
	Councillor Murray
	Councillor Nannestad
	Councillor Preston
	Councillor Toofany
	Councillor Tweddle
	Councillor Vaughan
	Councillor Woolley

 

Amendment 4:

 

For	Against	Abstention
Councillor Briggs	Councillor Bean
Councillor Dyer	Councillor Bilton
Councillor Hills	Councillor C Burke
Councillor Mara	Councillor S Burke
Councillor Reid	Councillor B Bushell
Councillor Spratt	Councillor L Bushell
Councillor Strengiel	Councillor Ellis
	Councillor Hewson
	Councillor J Kirk
	Councillor R Kirk
	Councillor Loffhagen
	Councillor Longbottom
	Councillor Mair
	Councillor McNulty
	Councillor Metcalfe
	Councillor Murray
	Councillor Nannestad
	Councillor Preston
	Councillor Toofany
	Councillor Tweddle
	Councillor Vaughan
	Councillor Woolley

 

Amendment 5:

 

For	Against	Abstention
Councillor Briggs	Councillor Bean
Councillor Dyer	Councillor Bilton
Councillor Hills	Councillor C Burke
Councillor Mara	Councillor S Burke
Councillor Reid	Councillor B Bushell
Councillor Spratt	Councillor L Bushell
Councillor Strengiel	Councillor Ellis
	Councillor Hewson
	Councillor J Kirk
	Councillor R Kirk
	Councillor Loffhagen
	Councillor Longbottom
	Councillor Mair
	Councillor McNulty
	Councillor Metcalfe
	Councillor Murray
	Councillor Nannestad
	Councillor Preston
	Councillor Toofany
	Councillor Tweddle
	Councillor Vaughan
	Councillor Woolley

 

Amendment 6:

 

For	Against	Abstention
Councillor Briggs	Councillor Bean
Councillor Dyer	Councillor Bilton
Councillor Hills	Councillor C Burke
Councillor Mara	Councillor S Burke
Councillor Reid	Councillor B Bushell
Councillor Spratt	Councillor L Bushell
Councillor Strengiel	Councillor Ellis
	Councillor Hewson
	Councillor J Kirk
	Councillor R Kirk
	Councillor Loffhagen
	Councillor Longbottom
	Councillor Mair
	Councillor McNulty
	Councillor Metcalfe
	Councillor Murray
	Councillor Nannestad
	Councillor Preston
	Councillor Toofany
	Councillor Tweddle
	Councillor Vaughan
	Councillor Woolley

 

Amendment 7:

 

For	Against	Abstention
Councillor Briggs	Councillor Bean
Councillor Dyer	Councillor Bilton
Councillor Hills	Councillor C Burke
Councillor Mara	Councillor S Burke
Councillor Reid	Councillor B Bushell
Councillor Spratt	Councillor L Bushell
Councillor Strengiel	Councillor Ellis
	Councillor Hewson
	Councillor J Kirk
	Councillor R Kirk
	Councillor Loffhagen
	Councillor Longbottom
	Councillor Mair
	Councillor McNulty
	Councillor Metcalfe
	Councillor Murray
	Councillor Nannestad
	Councillor Preston
	Councillor Toofany
	Councillor Tweddle
	Councillor Vaughan
	Councillor Woolley

 

Amendments 1 to 7 were therefore lost.

 

Returning to debate on the original motion, Councillor Bill Mara proposed the following amendment:

 

That £75,000 from the Vision 2025 fund be allocated for a new children’s play park in the Brant Road Area:

 

Insert within 6.2 on page 28 of the council agenda pack following the heritage action zone scheme “Brant Road Play Park - £75,000”.

 

In proposing the amendment Councillor Mara highlighted that Witham Ward had a growing population of young people who did not have many facilities within the ward, resulting in antisocial behaviour in the area. He had been contacted on numerous occasions from residents requesting the provision of a play park on Brant Road to address this issue and highlighted the benefits in relation to physical and mental health a new play park could provide.

 

Councillor Hilton Spratt seconded the amendment and agreed that Witham Ward had not received much investment from the City Council in this respect over the years, reflecting on marvellous facilities provided outside of the city border in North Hykeham and Waddington. He had also been contacted directly by residents requesting such a facility and agreed that the Council should listen to them.

 

Councillor Jackie Kirk clarified that Section 106 monies from developments usually sought to enhance areas in this way by providing community facilities such as play parks.

 

Councillor Helena Mair reported that the Council’s Play Strategy was in the process of being reviewed and that such a suggestion should be considered as part of that wider city strategy.

 

Councillor Biff Bean reflected on his recent fundraising activities in respect of a closed play park in Hartsholme and a recently successful national lottery grant bid which contributed to in excess of £200,000 having been raised to date to provide facilities, which included a multi-use games area at the park. He highlighted, therefore, that there were other ways of raising funds and providing activities for communities locally without relying on the Council.

 

Councillor Edmund Strengiel agreed that there were limited play facilities in this area and the south of the city when compared to the north.

 

Councillor Christopher Burke commended Councillor Mara for the sentiment of the amendment and agreed that more play areas were need across the city, but was disappointed that the amendment lacked further clarity as to how it would be funded in the context of the Council’s budget.

 

Councillor Metcalfe made the point that consideration of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy and budget was not the place for members to put forward specific projects relevant to their particular wards and agreed that consideration of this amendment should take place in the context of the Council’s wider Play Strategy.

 

Having been proposed and seconded, the amendment was voted upon. In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 19.7, a recorded vote was taken, the result of which was as follows:

 

For	Against	Abstention
Councillor Briggs	Councillor Bean
Councillor Dyer	Councillor Bilton
Councillor Hills	Councillor C Burke
Councillor Mara	Councillor S Burke
Councillor Reid	Councillor B Bushell
Councillor Spratt	Councillor L Bushell
Councillor Strengiel	Councillor Ellis
	Councillor Hewson
	Councillor J Kirk
	Councillor R Kirk
	Councillor Loffhagen
	Councillor Longbottom
	Councillor Mair
	Councillor McNulty
	Councillor Metcalfe
	Councillor Murray
	Councillor Nannestad
	Councillor Preston
	Councillor Toofany
	Councillor Tweddle
	Councillor Vaughan
	Councillor Woolley

 

The amendment was lost.

 

Debate continued on the original motion.

 

Councillor Ronald Hills made reference to the Western Growth Corridor which had been commented upon at the meeting of Budget Review Group and was a project that the Council had now invested £2.5 million into, without taking into account officer time. When reviewing the answer to his previous question on this subject earlier in the meeting, Councillor Hills reflected that there were three capital sums, namely the money required to build the entrance to the site, with the remaining two capital sums coming forward once planning permission had been granted for the project. The planning application had been lodged in April 2019 yet Councillor Hills could not find any reference to a live planning application on the Council’s website in relation to the Western Growth Corridor. He noted that the application had been revised following comments from Lincolnshire County Council in respect of the transport policy in September 2020. He referred members to page 94 of the agenda pack for this meeting which referenced a £100,000 earmarked reserve for the Western Growth Corridor which he said was not much in the context of the cost of the scheme. Councillor Hills felt, therefore, that there was not sufficient money available to pursue the scheme and that it would be necessary to borrow. Additionally, he was concerned that necessary finance would not be available to pay for necessary infrastructure, particularly significant structural elements such as the proposed bridge. He therefore questioned how the Medium Term Financial Strategy stood in the context of this major project, questioning its achievability and whether it would ever be realised, adding a further question as to when the planning application would be considered by the Council.

 

Councillor Metcalfe, as a right of reply on the original motion, reported that all of the central Lincolnshire local authorities and the County Council had signed up to the Western Growth Corridor a long time ago as a key means of delivering growth targets as the biggest sustainable urban extension in Lincoln. He explained that targets had been agreed with Government which they expected to be delivered. Councillor Metcalfe accepted that there were significant infrastructure costs associated with the scheme and the costs necessary to develop the site were very well known by the Government, adding that there was always a conundrum to consider in delivering infrastructure prior to beginning to yield gain from developing a site. This was the case for the Western Growth Corridor site, and other sites across the country, but it was his view that there needed to be public investment to realise these benefits. Another delay in respect of the project had not been down to the City Council with very unhelpful contributions from partners having been received in respect of the planning application. He was not in a position at this stage to confirm when the planning application would be considered by the Council but he hoped it would not be too long, adding that the will and co-operation from partners was there to deliver the project. Councillor Metcalfe closed by saying that the Western Growth Corridor held the future for Lincoln in terms of significant growth, infrastructure improvements and lots of other benefits to the city.

 

Having been proposed and seconded, the original motion was voted upon and it was RESOLVED that the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2021-2026 and the Capital Strategy 2021-2026, including the following elements, be approved:

 

·         A proposed council tax Increase of 1.9% for 2021/22.

 

·         The Council being member of the Lincolnshire Business Rates Pool in 2021/22

 

·         The General Fund Revenue Forecast 2021/22-2025/26 as shown in Appendix 1 and paragraph 4 of the report and the main basis on which this budget had been calculated.

 

·         The General Investment Programme 2021/22-2025/26 as shown in Appendix 2 and paragraph 6 of the report and the main basis on which the programme had been calculated.

 

·         The Housing Revenue Account Forecast 2021/22-2025/26 as shown in Appendix 3 and paragraph 5 of the report and the main basis on which this budget had been calculated.

 

·         The Housing Investment Programme 2021/22-2025/26 as shown in Appendix 4 and paragraph 7 of the report and the main basis on which the programme had been calculated.

 

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 19.7, a recorded vote was taken, the result of which was as follows:

 

For	Against	Abstention
Councillor Bean Councillor Bilton Councillor C Burke Councillor S Burke Councillor B Bushell Councillor L Bushell Councillor Ellis Councillor Hewson Councillor J Kirk Councillor R Kirk Councillor Loffhagen Councillor Longbottom Councillor Mair Councillor McNulty Councillor Metcalfe Councillor Murray Councillor Nannestad Councillor Preston Councillor Toofany Councillor Tweddle Councillor Vaughan Councillor Woolley	Councillor Briggs Councillor Dyer Councillor Hills Councillor Mara Councillor Reid Councillor Spratt Councillor Strengiel