Agenda item

It was moved by Councillor Biff Bean, seconded by Councillor Donald Nannestad and

 

RESOLVED that Council Procedure Rule 17.4 regarding the content and length of speeches be suspended to allow the Leader of the Council and the Opposition Group Leaders unlimited time to speak on Minute 35a.

 

Councillor Ric Metcalfe, Leader of the Council, proposed the recommendations contained within the report, as detailed on pages 21 and 22 of the agenda pack, in relation to the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2024-2029 and budget.

 

He reflected on strategic considerations and long-term financial sustainability, highlighting effective use of resources and demonstratable progress to support effective delivery of services and alignment with aspirations for strategic priorities. In addition, there were a number of Councils that had been served with or faced a Section 114 notice, a power given to s114 Officers within Council’s to challenge the sustainability of a Council’s plan. Due to the determination of elected Members, the skills of Officers and excellent financial stewardship, the City of Lincoln Council (CoLC) had not received such notice.

 

The Leader of the Council referred to section 4.4 of the report and confirmed that achievement for Council Taxpayers was significant when considered with the size of the authority in mind. He offered his thanks and gratitude to the hard working and dedicated staff for all achievements gained against the five strategic priorities.

 

Reference to achievements included, but were not limited to, growth within the City and urban regeneration projects, support for poorer households struggling with the cost of living crisis, the building of new homes and reduction in homelessness and aspirations for a carbon natural city by 2030.

 

Councillor Donald Nannestad, Deputy Leader of the Council, seconded the proposition and reiterated the points made. In addition, he added that there was a series of additional pressures such as inflation, difficulties in the supply chain and the cost of living crisis, all of which affected residents. Reference was also made to the need to pay over £1million to Internal Drainage Boards in levies, which were each increasing levies or more. Circa 15% of the levies received by the Council were transferred to the Internal Drainage Boards.

 

The Council’s housing stock was in good condition and the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) as seen at Appendix A to the report, outlined the considerable investments to be made to homes.

 

The Mayor, having received notice of the Leader of the Opposition’s intention to propose a number of amendments and notice of the Liberal Democrats 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). He reported, however, that each amendment would be voted upon separately.

 

Councillor Thomas Dyer, Leader of the Conservative Group, proposed the following amendments to the Medium Term Financial Strategy, which were seconded by Councillor Rachel Storer, Deputy Leader of the Conservative Group:

 

Amendment 1 – Boosting the Lincoln economy

 

• Increase the City Council’s “Events” budget by £190,000. The focus of this increase is to sustain the positive elements of the new events policy, but to also provide financial capacity to restore a new, sustainable, Lincoln Christmas Market.
• This increased budget is to be spent on increasing staffing capacity and to provide further resource for investment.
• The £190,000 will be funded by reducing a City Council budget within the DCE to £0. To keep this budget amendment in Part A, the specific service area cannot be detailed.
• Current staff working in the area proposed to have its budget removed will be redeployed into other service areas where there are vacancies. Alternatively, any redundancy costs can be funded from the earmarked reserves.

 

Amendment 2 – Temporary Accommodation

 

• The City of Lincoln Council continued to have significant difficulties with having enough suitable options for temporary accommodation within the City of Lincoln. The cost to 3rd party organisations continues to strain the City Council’s budget.
• The City of Lincoln Council recognise that it must direct action to both increase the supply of temporary accommodation and to therefore support some of Lincoln’s most vulnerable residents.
• The City of Lincoln Council, as part of its 24/25 budget, requests that officers put together a business plan for procuring a suitable temporary accommodation facility.
• The financing of such a scheme is to be paid back via the payments the City Council currently pay to 3rd party organisations.

 

Amendment 3 – Bus Shelter Investment Scheme

 

• The City of Lincoln Council currently own 45 bus shelters across Lincoln. There is currently no budget to maintain these assets.
• For the 2024/25 financial year a £50,000 budget, funded from the Vision 2025/2030 reserve will be utilised in repairing and cleaning these assets.
• The scheme will be reviewed at the end of the financial year and consideration will be given to permanently funding such a scheme.

 

It was noted that the figures contained in proposal 1 had been verified by Financial Services and were in accordance with the budget estimates included in the proposed MTFS 2024-2029.

 

In relation to proposal 2, subject to capacity within the relevant service area there were no direct financial implications arising from requesting that a business plan was developed. However, it was recommended that a discussion with housing colleagues was had, as work in response to the temporary accommodation pressures was already underway which included looking at suitable new accommodation. The financing of any actual scheme would be subject to a full financial assessment as part of the Council’s usual governance processes.

 

The figures contained in proposal 3, in relation to the non-recurrent funding for 2024/25, had been verified by Financial Services and were in accordance with the budget estimates included in the proposed MTFS 2024-2029. Ongoing funding would need to be identified in the new MTFS 2025-2030.

 

Councillor Rachel Storer, as seconder of the motion, stated that the budget amendments were reasonable and would bring back a sustainable Christmas Market and there was a clear need for a budget for bus shelters and therefore would ask Council to support the amendments of the Conservative Group.

 

During the discussion on the proposed amendments, the following points were noted:

 

• It was commented that the proposed reinstatement of the Christmas Market had not been fully costed nor had it taken into account issues such as not being able to change or extend road closures or the safety of staff or anyone visiting the market.
• There was a need for the Government to provide additional funding for temporary accommodation.
• Several members reiterated that responsibility for bus shelters lay with Lincolnshire County Council and therefore any proposals relating to bus shelters should be directed to that council. However, as bus shelters were branded with ‘City of Lincoln Council’ logos, it was suggested that the state of disrepair reflected badly on the Council and therefore it should consider supporting this amendment.

 

Councillor Ric Metcalfe, using his right to reply, advised that he would not be in support of any of the amendments. Referencing amendment one, Council was reminded that the decision relating to the Lincoln Christmas Market was made at a public meeting of the Executive and upon advice from an independent body relating to safety, the decision to close the Christmas Market was taken. The amendment did not address how the safety concerns would be addressed.

 

Referencing amendment two, it was noted that the Council could not run effectively in the absence of suitable management. Housing services within the Council employed over 300 individuals and spent millions of pounds of tenants’ money on a wide range of investment – under the supervision of appropriate management.

 

Referencing amendment three, it was reiterated that bus shelters come under the remit of Lincolnshire County Council and therefore not a responsibility of the City of Lincoln Council.

 

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

 

Amendment 1:

 

For (12)	Against (16)	Abstention (1)
Councillor A Briggs	Councillor D Armiger	Councillor N Chapman
Councillor M Christopher	Councillor B Bean
Councillor D Clarkson	Councillor C Burke
Councillor T Dyer	Councillor S Burke
Councillor M Fido	Councillor G Hewson
Councillor B Mara	Councillor R Longbottom
Councillor C Smalley	Councillor A McNulty
Councillor H Spratt	Councillor R Metcalfe
Councillor M Storer	Councillor D Nannestad
Councillor R Storer	Councillor L Preston
Councillor E Strengiel	Councillor D Stothard
Councillor A Wells	Councillor P Vaughan
	Councillor C Watt
	Councillor J Wells
	Councillor E Wood
	Councillor L Woolley

Amendment 2

 

For (12)	Against (17)	Abstention (0)
Councillor A Briggs	Councillor D Armiger
Councillor N Chapman	Councillor B Bean
Councillor D Clarkson	Councillor C Burke
Councillor T Dyer	Councillor S Burke
Councillor M Fido	Councillor M Christopher
Councillor B Mara	Councillor G Hewson
Councillor C Smalley	Councillor R Longbottom
Councillor H Spratt	Councillor A McNulty
Councillor M Storer	Councillor R Metcalfe
Councillor R Storer	Councillor D Nannestad
Councillor E Strengiel	Councillor L Preston
Councillor A Wells	Councillor D Stothard
	Councillor P Vaughan
	Councillor C Watt
	Councillor J Wells
	Councillor E Wood
	Councillor L Woolley

Amendment 3

 

For (13)	Against (16)	Abstention (0)
Councillor A Briggs	Councillor D Armiger
Councillor N Chapman	Councillor B Bean
Councillor M Christopher	Councillor C Burke
Councillor D Clarkson	Councillor S Burke
Councillor T Dyer	Councillor G Hewson
Councillor M Fido	Councillor R Longbottom
Councillor B Mara	Councillor A McNulty
Councillor C Smalley	Councillor R Metcalfe
Councillor H Spratt	Councillor D Nannestad
Councillor M Storer	Councillor L Preston
Councillor R Storer	Councillor D Stothard
Councillor E Strengiel	Councillor P Vaughan
Councillor A Wells	Councillor C Watt
	Councillor J Wells
	Councillor E Wood
	Councillor L Woolley

Amendments 1 to 3 were therefore declared lost.

 

Returning to the debate on the original motion, Councillor Clare Smalley, Leader of the Liberal Democrats Group proposed the following amendments, which were seconded by Councillor Martin Christopher, Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrats Group:

 

Amendment 1 - Bus Shelter Improvement Programme

 

(a)  £20K to be allocated from the Corporate Repairs and Maintenance Reserve. This new programme will provide repairs, replacement and new installations where necessary across the city to City of Lincoln branded/owned bus shelters.

 

Amendment 2 - Pride in Lincoln Programme

 

(a)  £33K to be allocated from the Community Chest Fund. This funding will retain its community focus but will empower Lincoln’s community by investing in targeted improvements. Funding would be allocated per member (£1K per member) and will allow local wards to invest directly in improvements to local communities, from installing new benches to making grants to community and voluntary organisations.

 

In proposing the amendments, Councillor Clare Smalley advised that the figures in amendments 1 and 2 had been verified by Financial Services and were in accordance with the budget estimates included in the proposed MTFS 2024-2029. Councillor Martin Christopher seconded the proposal but reserved his right to speak.

 

During the discussion on the proposed amendments, the following points were noted:

 

• It was commented that the City of Lincoln Council had previously had something similar to the proposed Pride in Lincoln Programme, which the councillor commented had worked well, however the Labour Party had removed it as part of budget cuts.
• A councillor commented on the vast financial savings the council had previously had to make, with a further £1.75million of savings required.
• It was commented that similar schemes in neighbouring authorities had worked well.

 

Councillor Martin Christopher, who had reserved his right to speak as seconder to the amendments, advised that an effective bus shelter improvement programme was important and a vital step for the Council. The use of public transport was essential in the achievement of net zero emissions by 2030. Bus shelters displayed the City of Lincoln Council logo upon them and as such, if a bus shelter fell into disrepair, there was the potential that the perception of the Council could be negatively affected. Referencing amendment 2, it was noted that a small pot of funding to represent a number of people individually was positive.

 

Councillor Ric Metcalfe, using his right to reply, advised that bus shelter in disrepair would require the deployment of considerable resource. The Council position was that there was not surplus funding within the corporate repairs and management revenue. The issue arose from a legacy element. It was not the City of Lincoln Council’s responsibility nor was a financial contribution possible. It was also advised that amendment 2 would not be supported, as it was considered a duplication of the Prosperity Fund in each ward.

 

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

 

Amendment 1:

 

For (13)	Against (16)	Abstention (0)
Councillor A Briggs	Councillor D Armiger
Councillor N Chapman	Councillor B Bean
Councillor M Christopher	Councillor C Burke
Councillor D Clarkson	Councillor S Burke
Councillor T Dyer	Councillor G Hewson
Councillor M Fido	Councillor R Longbottom
Councillor B Mara	Councillor A McNulty
Councillor C Smalley	Councillor R Metcalfe
Councillor H Spratt	Councillor D Nannestad
Councillor M Storer	Councillor L Preston
Councillor R Storer	Councillor D Stothard
Councillor E Strengiel	Councillor P Vaughan
Councillor A Wells	Councillor C Watt
	Councillor J Wells
	Councillor E Wood
	Councillor L Woolley

Amendment 2:

 

For (13)	Against (16)	Abstention (0)
Councillor A Briggs	Councillor D Armiger
Councillor N Chapman	Councillor B Bean
Councillor M Christopher	Councillor C Burke
Councillor D Clarkson	Councillor S Burke
Councillor T Dyer	Councillor G Hewson
Councillor M Fido	Councillor R Longbottom
Councillor B Mara	Councillor A McNulty
Councillor C Smalley	Councillor R Metcalfe
Councillor H Spratt	Councillor D Nannestad
Councillor M Storer	Councillor L Preston
Councillor R Storer	Councillor D Stothard
Councillor E Strengiel	Councillor P Vaughan
Councillor A Wells	Councillor C Watt
	Councillor J Wells
	Councillor E Wood
	Councillor L Woolley

Amendments 1 and 2 were therefore declared lost.

 

Returning to the debate on the original motion, Councillor Bill Mara proposed the following amendment, which was seconded by Councillor Hilton Spratt:

 

Amendment 1 – Investment in Children’s Areas in Witham Ward

 

Allocate £75,000 from the Vision 2025/2030 reserve for a new children’s play park / picnic area in the Brant Road area.

 

It was noted that the figures contained in proposal 1 had been verified by Financial Services and were in accordance with the budget estimates included in the proposed MTFS 2024-2029, however there would be an additional ongoing revenue requirement for repairs and maintenance for any new play area. Unless additional revenue budgets were identified, this would place pressure on existing repairs and maintenance budgets.

 

Furthermore, it was advised that this proposal would enhance the mental health of both young people and old and also go a long way to making young people feel valued. It was also highlighted that the election labour candidate for Witham Ward and Labour MP candidate were also lobbying for investment in children’s areas in Witham Ward. 

 

Councillor Hilton Spratt, who had reserved his right to speak as seconder to the amendment, reiterated the above and requested that Council supported this amendment.

 

Councillor Ric Metcalfe, using his right to reply, advised that the amendment would not be supported as no consideration had been given to the additional ongoing revenue requirement for repairs and maintenance for any new play area, and therefore adding a budget pressure. Furthermore, the appropriateness of a ward councillor bringing forward an amendment of this type was put into question, as it was not appropriate for amendments on individual ward matters.

 

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

 

Amendment 1:

 

For (12)	Against (16)	Abstention (1)
Councillor A Briggs	Councillor D Armiger	Councillor N Chapman
Councillor M Christopher	Councillor B Bean
Councillor D Clarkson	Councillor C Burke
Councillor T Dyer	Councillor S Burke
Councillor M Fido	Councillor G Hewson
Councillor B Mara	Councillor R Longbottom
Councillor C Smalley	Councillor A McNulty
Councillor H Spratt	Councillor R Metcalfe
Councillor M Storer	Councillor D Nannestad
Councillor R Storer	Councillor L Preston
Councillor E Strengiel	Councillor D Stothard
Councillor A Wells	Councillor P Vaughan
	Councillor C Watt
	Councillor J Wells
	Councillor E Wood
	Councillor L Woolley

Amendment 1 was therefore declared lost.

 

Council returned to the original motion.

 

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

 

For (16)	Against (13)	Abstention (0)
Councillor D Armiger	Councillor A Briggs
Councillor B Bean	Councillor N Chapman
Councillor C Burke	Councillor M Christopher
Councillor S Burke	Councillor D Clarkson
Councillor G Hewson	Councillor T Dyer
Councillor R Longbottom	Councillor M Fido
Councillor A McNulty	Councillor B Mara
Councillor R Metcalfe	Councillor C Smalley
Councillor D Nannestad	Councillor H Spratt
Councillor L Preston	Councillor M Storer
Councillor D Stothard	Councillor R Storer
Councillor P Vaughan	Councillor E Strengiel
Councillor C Watt	Councillor A Wells
Councillor J Wells
Councillor E Wood
Councillor L Woolley

The motion was declared carried.

 

It was therefore RESOLVED that the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2024-2029 and the Capital Strategy 2024-2029, including the following specific elements, be approved:

 

·       A council tax increase of 2.92% for 2024/25.

 

·       The Council being a member of the Lincolnshire Business Rates Pool in 2024/25.

 

·       The General Fund Revenue Forecast 2024/25-2028/29 as shown in Appendix 1 and the main basis on which this budget had been calculated (as set out in paragraph 4).

 

·       The Housing Revenue Account Forecast 2024/25-2028/29 as shown in Appendix 2 and the main basis on which this budget had been calculated (as set out in paragraph 5).

 

·       The General Investment Programme 2024/25-2028/29 as shown in Appendix 3, and the main basis on which the programme had been calculated (as set out in paragraph 6).

 

·       The Housing Investment Programme 2024/25-2028/29 as shown in Appendix 4, and the main basis on which the programme had been calculated (as set out in paragraph 7).