Agenda and draft minutes

To confirm as a correct record.

The minutes were confirmed and signed as a correct record.

To receive the minutes of this meeting.

The minutes of the meeting, as attached at Appendix A, were considered.

R E S O L V E D – that the minutes of the meeting, attached at Appendix A, be received.

A report was submitted which included:

(i)            progress against the 2025/26 budget preparation timetable, including a draft budget report and an updated Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) to 2028/29.

(ii)           estimates of pressures and savings by committee for 2025/26 – 2028/29.

(iii)          a progress update on the Future Tandridge Programme, including a two-year savings plan, the programme risk register and a highlight report for October 2024.

(iv)          information on Council Tax and earmarked reserves.

The draft budget, which was balanced, was based on the principles agreed by Full Council in October and contained four key elements; likely funding, pressures, savings and reserves.

Attention was drawn to budget pressures of £1.2m and the two-year savings target of £1.8m. Reserves and contingencies were also highlighted, and it was expected there would be earmarked reserves of £4.7m by the end of 2024/25 along with the £3m General Fund. The Council’s reserves had seen steady improvement over the last two years. Earmarked reserves were held for specific purposes and remained below average.

The next step in the budget setting process was a Fees & Charges Workshop with Councillors in early December. The Local Government Finance Settlement was expected shortly before Christmas, and considerations may be necessary after it was received.

In response to comments on the draft budget, Officers explained:

·         the draft budget included assumptions for vacancy factors, recruitment, a level of interim staff in Planning and new Employer’s National Insurance contributions, of which 50% was assumed to be funded by the Government.

·         MyAccount savings had been built into the draft budget.

·         pressures existed in relation to a number of overheads following the closure of the Wellbeing Prescription service.

·         the £60k savings on community grants had been offset for one year, from the business rate pooling gain, to minimise the impact for community organisations on the reduction of grants.

·         the rationale for retaining ringfencing of earmarked reserves

·         the rationale for assuming the amount retained from business rates would reduce in 2026/27, based on the expectation of Government funding reform. This would be kept under review, with an explanation of the assumption included in the MTFS.

·         in relation to the possible transfer of some community assets to Parish Councils, savings had been factored into the draft budget. The Council would work with a pilot group of Parish Councils to develop a model that worked for all parties that could be rolled out to other Parishes. Officers would consider whether the Council could apply for grants as well as Parish Councils.

            R E S O L V E D – that

A)   the Draft Budget for 2025/26 and Medium-Term Financial Strategy to 2028/29, set out in Appendix A to the report and which will form the basis of reports to each Policy Committee in January, be approved.

B)   the following elements to form the basis of the budgets to be finalised during the January Committee cycle be approved:

a.    The Budget Pressures (set out in Appendix A section 6 and Appendix B of the report).

b.    The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 175.

An analysis of performance against the Committee’s key performance indicators (KPIs) for the second quarter (July to September 2024) for 2024/2025 was presented. All KPIs had met their target for the quarter.

In terms of improving indicators, it was noted:

·         SR3: Days taken to process Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit new claims was below the target of 30 days, at 25 days, for the first time in the year

·         SR5: The number of working days/shifts lost due to sickness absence (long and short term, rolling 12-month figure) was below the target of 7.1 days at 6.56 days. This was the lowest figure in 5 years.

Two interim indicators related to call handling were also highlighted in the report. These showed Customer Services had dealt with more than 62% of total calls to the Council’s main number and resolved 58% of them without transferring them to another team. On average, 334 callers a month were using the callback system. As more data was collected and the new telephone system was better understood, Officers would improve routing and service management of calls.

The report also presented the Committee’s and Corporate risk registers. There was one red risk on the Committee’s register, SR17: Responding to FOIs, SARs and Ombudsman complaints within the set timescales. The Legal team were implementing a range of measures to improve timeliness of responses.

There were two red risks on the Corporate risk register, SR17, as noted above, and H6: Inability to procure compliance contracts due to lack of resource. The risk was being monitored by the Head of Housing.

Members asked several questions on call handling, with officers confirming that Customer Services was taking and resolving more calls than the rest of the Council.  In terms of the call back function, officers confirmed this keeps callers place in the queue and their call is automatically answered when it reaches the front of the queue. Officers do not physically call people back, they just pick up the next call as normal. Officers would explore if data could be captured on the time it took for residents to receive a call back.

R E S O L V E D – that the Quarter 2 2024-2025 performance indicators and committee and corporate risks be noted.

An analysis of forecast expenditure against the Council’s overall revenue budget of £12.799m as at the end of September 2024 (Month 6) was presented.

A full year revenue underspend of £165k for the Council was forecast, without using corporate contingencies of £1,166k. A balanced outturn was expected with no need to call on general reserves. The report noted there were significant risks around inflation, temporary accommodation costs, planning appeals and audit fees that would continue to be managed. Appendix A to the report provided further details on the forecast underspend by each Committee.

The report confirmed £464k of the £586k savings target was rated achieved or green for delivery. £72k was rated amber and £50k was rated red or unachievable.

In terms of the Capital Programme, with a budget of £29,407k, there was a forecast £850k of net slippage. This was made up of £356k from the General Fund and £494k in the Housing Revenue Account.

The Committee’s revenue budget was forecasting a £71k overspend. This had changed from a £8k underspend in Quarter 1 and mainly related to a reduced salary capitalisation in IT and a one off interim resource in Policy and Communications. There was a £212k underspend on corporate items forecast. In relation to the Committee’s capital budget, which had been set at £2,852k, Officers were forecasting slippage of £74k.

During the debate, Members discussed:

·         whether the forecast was pessimistic or prudent given the level of contingencies and risks the Council was managing.

·         the likelihood of costs for planning appeals to be high, especially given their increasing complexity and frequency.

·         the importance of ensuring lessons from underspends were learnt.

·         ensuring the Council’s financial position was communicated clearly to residents and Parish Councils.

In response, Officers explained:

·         that, where possible, risks had been quantified and the contingencies were expected to be sufficient with no call on the general reserves but, as requested by the Chair, work would continue to understand better the extent of risk, in particular in the Planning area.

·         the general reserves remained modest given the size of the Council’s turnover and the risks of costs from planning appeals.

·         IT capitalisation was based on an assumed work programme with elements funded from both the general fund and the capital programme. The reported variance was as a result of it not being possible to capitalise as much of the work that had been undertaken as anticipated.

R E S O L V E D – that the Revenue and Capital budget forecast positions as at Quarter 2 / M6 (September) 2024/2025 be noted.

The Committee were presented with a report recommending Full Council grant approval for a change of ward name from ‘Lingfield & Crowhurst’ to ‘Lingfield, Crowhurst & Tandridge’. This followed a 5-week public consultation, agreed to by the Committee at its meeting on 26 September, in which 93% of respondents were in favour.

Following the consultation, the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) had been approached as part of the statutory process.

On recommendation to Full Council, a special meeting of the Council would be held to consider the recommendation. It was hoped this would be alongside the ordinary meeting on 19 December 2024 but it could not be held until the LGBCE had granted approval.

COUNCIL DECISION

(subject to ratification by Council)

R E C O M M E N D E D ­– that Full Council approval be granted to a change of ward name from ‘Lingfield & Crowhurst’ to ‘Lingfield, Crowhurst & Tandridge’.

A draft timetable of Council and Committee meetings for 2025/26 was considered.

COUNCIL DECISION

(subject to ratification by Council)

R E C O M M E N D E D ­– that, notwithstanding the scope for additional meetings to be convened in consultation with relevant committee chair(s), the 2025/26 timetable of meetings, attached at Appendix B, be recommended to Full Council for adoption.

The Committee received a report recommending amendments to Standing Order 18, Committee and Sub-Committee business, of the Council’s Constitution. The amendments would formalise the Council’s internal Committee report writing processes. The amendments would recognise the Management Team sponsorship of a report, the need for report authors to share reports with the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Committee, and the Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council in good time, and the Chair’s discretion to remove items from the agenda if they have not met the deadline for sharing with them.

COUNCIL DECISION

(subject to ratification by Council)

R E C O M M E N D E D ­– that Standing Order 18, Committee and Sub- Committee Business, of the Council’s Constitution be amended as outlined in Appendix C.