Decision details

RESOLVED:

That Cabinet:

1.     note the latest budget forecasts of the General Fund, HRA, and Capital; and

2.     Recommend that Council approve the reallocation of the net residual 2024/25 Pay Award contingency (£496,000) to create a new £150,000 Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) reserve, with the remaining £346,000 being applied to the Council’s existing Corporate Priority Reserve.

KEY DECISION:

Report to Cabinet and Council

PORTFOLIO:

Finance and Corporate

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED/REJECTED:

As set out in the report.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST:

None

DISCUSSION:

The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Corporate presented the third quarter financial monitoring report.  He noted there were a number of variations of the general fund but the most significant change was to the Housing Revenue Account (HRA), which was currently presenting a £207,000 surplus.

The following general fund variations were highlighted:

·        Waste transition costs – an increase of £39,000, however given this was a major project, it was not to be unexpected. 

·        Additional business rate costs plus loss of income due to voids, of £248,000 in relation to Jubilee Business Park and Queensway. 

·        A reduction in public lighting costs of £50,000 due to lower than expected electricity costs. 

·        There was some remaining contingency funds held following the pay award. It was proposed that the remaining funds be reallocated to create a new £150,000 Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation Reserve.  This was a significant change and had been an unforeseen requirement when the budget had been set last year and to top up the Corporate Priority reserve by £346,000.

In relation to the HRA, £248,000 was required to prioritise works to void properties to bring them back into use, however this pressure was offset against the additional rental income of £400,000 exceeding that which had been budgeted for.   There was also an additional benefit of £277,000 to reflect the outcome of the pay award costs.

A non-Cabinet Member questioned the waste transition costs and the reason for £12,000 falling within the remit of the Finance and Corporate Services rather than the Environment and Sustainability Portfolio.  The Assistant Director – Finance reported that the waste project was cross cutting, and that this cost was in relation to customer services which was within the Finance and Corporate Portfolio.