The Executive Member for
Finance gave his budget speech, stating that whilst separate
reports, the following seven items all related to the same budget
and as such they would be discussed and voted on together. For the
purpose of these minutes the discussion and voting are recorded as
one, but the resolutions are set out under each separate
item.
The Executive Member reminded
Council that an amendment to the HRA subsidy buyout recommendation
(c) had been tabled which provided for consultation with the
Scrutiny Commission / Finance, Audit & Performance Committee
before a decision being made by the Executive with the (non-voting)
involvement of the Leader and Deputy Leader of the Opposition Group
and Chair of Scrutiny Commission.
With regard to Council tax, it
was stated that this had again been frozen in line with Government
recommendations in response to concerns about the public being
under pressure in the current economic climate.
During discussion on the seven
reports, the following points were made and questions
raised:
- The importance of
ensuring a large part of the income was not being spent to service
debt;
- Support for the
amended recommendation on the HRA subsidy buyout;
- The need to ensure
residents were aware of the implications of options for use of the
Argents Mead site;
- Whether the cost of
demolition anticipated for the current council offices was still
valid;
- The risk of eroding
the Council tax base by maintaining 0% increases and risk that the
public will have this expectation for future years;
- Concern whether the
decrease in the budget for Disabled Facilities Grants would lead to
increased waiting lists;
- Whether potential
income from the Community Infrastructure Levy had been factored
into the budget papers;
- The timing for a
decision on future leisure centre provision bearing in mind the
impending end of the current contract and how this would be
financed given the lack of capital funding;
- Where funding for the
sustainable urban extensions would come from particularly as the
core strategy had identified the cost of development.
Mrs Richards left the meeting
at 7.59pm.
In response, the Executive
Member for Finance made the following points:
- In four to five years
the leisure centre would require major work costing between
£4m and £6m which had to be weighed up against the cost
of a new leisure centre for approximately £10m. Initial
appraisals would be completed within the next couple of
months.
- The projected costs
of demolishing the current council offices had been checked again
and were still accurate.
- There would still be
no waiting list for Disabled Facilities Grants.
- Income from the
Community Infrastructure Levy had not been included in the
projections as there was no CIL Charging Structure in place at the
present time and would not be included until after
2014.
- Development in the
sustainable urban extensions would be funded by the private sector,
mostly by the developers. The core strategy had merely identified
the infrastructure schedule and showed costs of development but did
not indicate an intention for the authority to fund the
development. It was agreed that this would be discussed and a
response sent to all Members to clarify.
Mr Ladkin left the meeting at
8.29pm.
On reaching the end of
discussion and a vote on all seven items, including the amended
recommendation regarding the HRA subsidy buyout, Mr Bray along with
a further seven Members requested that voting be
recorded.
The vote was taken as
follows:
Mr Bannister, Mr Bill, Mr Bray,
Mr Cartwright, Mr Cope, Mr Crooks, Mr Gould, Mrs Hall, Mr Hall, Mrs
Hodgkins, Mr Hulbert, Mr Inman, Mr Lynch, Mr Mullaney, Miss Taylor
and Ms Witherford voted FOR the motion (16);
Mr Allen and Mrs Smith voted
AGAINST the motion (2);
Mr Batty, Mr Bessant, Mrs
Camamile, Mrs Chastney, Mr Lay, Mr Moore, Mr Morrell, Mr
O’Shea, Mrs Sprason, Mr Sutton and Mr Ward abstained from
voting.
The motions were therefore
CARRIED and resolved as recorded under each separate minute
below.