Agenda item

Colleen Warren, Financial Services Manager:

a)    presented a report to Performance Scrutiny Committee with a summary of actual income and expenditure compared to the revised budget and how any surpluses had been allocated to reserves

b)    provided information on the Council’s:

·         General Fund Revenue Account – for 2022/23 the Council’s net General Fund Revenue Budget was set at £8,907,490, including a planned contribution from balances of £60,700 resulting in an estimated level of general balances at the year-end of £2,262,761 (Appendix A provided a provisional General Fund Summary. There were a significant number of provisional year-end variations in income and expenditure against the approved budget. Full details of the main variances were provided in Appendix B.

·         Housing Revenue Account – the financial performance quarterly monitoring report for the 3^rd quarter predicted an underspend of £961. The provisional outturn for 2022/23 now indicated an improvement of £119,614, resulting in an overall budget underspend of £120,575 (including additional transfers to/from earmarked reserves). This would result in HRA balances as at 31^st March 2023 of £1,184,447. There were a significant number of provisional year-end variations in income and expenditure against the approved budget. Full details of the main variances were provided in Appendix D.

·         Housing Repairs Service – For 2022/23 the Council’s Housing Repairs Service net budget was set at zero, which reflected its full cost recovery nature.  The outturn for 2022/23 showed a trading deficit of £221,845, a movement of £198,439. The movement was as a result of the delay in billing of void jobs as highlighted at Q3, which made forecasting the outturn position difficult. Appendix E provided a forecast summary, with full details of the main variances provided in Appendix F.

c)    provided information in the following areas:

·         General Investment Programme – the last quarterly report approved a General Fund Investment Programme for 2022/23 of £17,860,202. Movements in the programme since revised budget approval decreased actual capital expenditure in 2022/23 to £10,871,844. A summary of the budget changes were shown at paragraph 7.2.

The overall cumulative spending on the General Investment Programme excluding externally delivered schemes for 2022/23 was £8,602,314 which was 57.6% (including externally delivered schemes overall spending was £10,817,967, which was 60.57%) of the revised 2022/23 programme as per the MTFS 2023-28.

·         Housing Investment Programme – the last quarterly report approved a Housing Investment Programme for 2022/23 of £20,498,524. Movements in the programme since approval of the revised budget decreased actual capital expenditure to £12,647,269 in 2022/23. A summary of the changes was shown in paragraph 7.9 with a detailed breakdown of the Programme being shown at Appendix J.

d)    invited members’ comments and questions.

Question: Referred to the reduction in income as a result in the decline of bin sales in relation to garden waste and asked if this would have a knock on effect on the Biffa contract and would a cost increase be passed on to the customer.

Response: There was less take up on green bins last year due to the dry summer. It was hoped that there would be more take up this year. Recent figures showed that we were ahead of budget. It was an additional charge which would be absorbed within the waste contract.

Question: Asked if visitors who used the electric charging point spaces and paid to charge their car also paid for the parking space – or did they park for free?

Response: An answer would be provided following the meeting.

Question: Asked if there had been any unexpected cleaning costs at the car park during 2022/23.

Response: The cleaning costs had been scheduled into the budget.

Question: Asked if the Tourist Information Centre was a cost neutral service.

Response: – The Tourist Information Centre was a subsidised service. It was currently over achieving on income, and was performing significantly better but was not a cost neutral service yet.

Question: Asked how much more it cost on average to pay agency staff compared to if they were employed by the City of Lincoln Council.

Response: It cost significantly more to pay agency staff but there were currently difficulties in recruiting staff and the resources were needed.

Question: Further asked if a percentage could be provided in relation to the above.

Response: An answer would be provided following the meeting.

Question: Referred to the increase in budget for the Western Growth Corridor 1b Bridges and asked if it would be funded.
Response: Confirmed that the bridges were funded.

Question: Referred to page 58 in relation to the vehicle fleet and commented that the cost was much lower than expected.
Response: Last quarters budget was based on a worst case scenario, we did not have details of how many vehicles were needed. We bought half the number of vehicles than expected and so the cost significantly reduced.

Question: Referred to the underspend in previous years in the disabled facilities grant budget and asked if the underspend was due to a reduced number of people or the contractors.
Response: Following the Covid 19 pandemic there had been an increase in the demand for disability grants due to occupants being happier for contractors to enter their properties. There was currently one member of staff working in the disabled facilities grants, and we were currently out to recruitment for another member of staff. The balance in the budget was reducing as more of the budget was being spent than received.
Question: Would the time frame in people receiving the grants reduce.
Response: Yes, once the extra staff were recruited.

Question: Asked how much it cost on average to house someone in temporary accommodation.
Response: It cost the Council significantly more to house someone in temporary accommodation.

RESOLVED that:

1.    Relevant responses to questions raised by members be provided by officers following the meeting as requested.

2.    The report be noted and forwarded to Executive for approval.