Agenda item

71/19              

The Council considered a report that detailed the formal proposals of the Executive in order to achieve a balanced Budget for 2020/21.

 

Following an introduction from the Leader, the Chairman reminded the meeting that two amendments had been received in accordance with the Budget and Policy Framework Procedure Rules and these would be considered in the order that they had been received.

 

Amendment Number 1 (proposed by Cllr Birch and seconded by Cllr McKay):

 

‘That the Partnership Funding level of £96,647 be increased to provide for the addition of funding to the sum of £10,000 to the CVS subject to it demonstrating it meets the criteria set out at para 2.38 of the Revenue Budget report to the Executive on 6 February 2020.’

 

In his introduction, the proposer highlighted that the Executive proposal was in total contradiction to the recommendation of the joint meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel and Development Management Committee meeting held on 23 January 2020 (Minute OSDM.3/19 refers) whereby the funding for the South Hams CVS should be reinstated to £10,000.

 

In addition, the proposer also pointed out that, at its meeting on 19 September 2019, the Executive had made the decision to ‘adopt a Commissioning Model to award Partnership Funding from 2020-23, based on one (or all) of the following: 1. Local Need; 2. Alignment to the Council’s Corporate Strategy; and 3. Statutory Duty’ (Minute E.36/19 refers).  In stating that the CVS met criterion 1 and 2, the Member was of the view that the Executive had overlooked this decision when recommending that the Grant be reduced from £10,000 to £5,000.

 

During the ensuing debate on the amendment, reference was made to:-

 

(a)     the work of the CVS.  In support of the amendment, a number of Members paid tribute to the CVS and the work that the organisation carried out.  Whilst not disputing the point, some other Members did state that the Council had still not received any evidence to demonstrate that it was receiving value for money from the CVS.  As a result, these Members advised that they were willing to support the amendment but did emphasise that this was on the proviso that the CVS provided the necessary evidence that they demonstrated at least one of the criteria that was referred to by the proposer;

 

(b)   a potential loophole in the amendment.  Due to the subjective nature of the wording, a Member stated his opposition to the amendment.

 

In line with statutory requirements, a recorded vote was then undertaken on this amendment.  The voting on this amendment was recorded as follows:-

 

For the motion (25):    Cllrs Abbott, Austen, Baldry, Bastone, Birch, Brown, Chown, Foss, Hawkins, Hodgson, Holway, Hopwood, Jackson, May, McKay, O’Callaghan, Pannell, Pearce, Pennington, Pringle, Reeve, Rowe, Smerdon, Spencer and Taylor

 

Against the motion (3):  Cllrs Brazil, Kemp and Long

 

Abstentions (1):  Cllr Sweett

 

Absent (2):  Cllrs Rose and Thomas

 

and the vote on this amendment was therefore declared CARRIED.

 

Amendment Number 2 (proposed by Cllr Brazil and seconded by Cllr Baldry)

 

‘1.   That Car Parking Charges be frozen (Costing £80,000);

2.    That the CVS Grant be maintained at £10,000 (Costing £5,000) (**NB. this part was dealt with in the previous amendment**);

 

With the £85,000 cost being offset by:

 

1.     Ceasing the funding of the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) (Saving £5,000);

2.     Adding £40,000 to car parking income (as per the 2019/20 outrun figures);

3.     Adding £15,000 to planning application income (well below the 2019/20 outrun figures);

4.     Removing the proposed Economy Officer post (saving £25,000).

 

At this point, the Chairman informed that it was her intention for each part of this amendment to be debated and voted upon separately.

 

Freezing of Car Parking Charges

 

In support of their amendment, the proposer and seconder highlighted the intention to increase the usage of Council Car Parks and to provide a much needed boost to local businesses.

 

In discussion, the Leader advised that it was her intention for this increase to be the only one imposed during this four year Council administration.  Also, the Leader requested that officers set up a new Reserve for any Car Park Revenue Surpluses to be allocated and ringfenced towards the establishment of Electric Charging Points in Council owned Car Parks.

In line with statutory requirements, a recorded vote was then undertaken on this part of the amendment.  The voting on this part was recorded as follows:

 

For the motion (10):    Cllrs Abbott, Baldry, Birch, Brazil, Jackson, Kemp, Long, McKay, O’Callaghan and Pannell

 

Against the motion (19):  Cllrs Austen, Bastone, Brown, Chown, Foss, Hawkins, Hodgson, Holway, Hopwood, May, Pearce, Pennington, Pringle, Reeve, Rowe, Smerdon, Spencer, Sweett and Taylor

 

Abstentions (0):  None.

 

Absent (2):  Cllrs Rose and Thomas

 

and the vote on this amendment was therefore declared LOST.

 

Ceasing the Funding to the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP)

The proposer and seconder questioned the benefits that had been gained by the South Hams from the LEP and made the point that the Economic Policy that had been produced by the LEP had still not been signed off by Central Government.

 

The Leader advised that, since every indication was that the Shared Prosperity Fund monies would be allocated through the LEP, then it would be her recommendation that the funding should be retained.

 

In line with statutory requirements, a recorded vote was then undertaken on this part of the amendment.  The voting on this part was recorded as follows:

 

For the motion (12):    Cllrs Abbott, Baldry, Birch, Brazil, Hodgson, Jackson, Kemp, Long, McKay, O’Callaghan, Pannell and Sweett

 

Against the motion (17):  Cllrs Austen, Bastone, Brown, Chown, Foss, Hawkins, Holway, Hopwood, May, Pearce, Pennington, Pringle, Reeve, Rowe, Smerdon, Spencer and Taylor

 

Abstentions (0):  None.

 

Absent (2):  Cllrs Rose and Thomas

 

and the vote on this amendment was therefore declared LOST.

 

Adding to Car Parking Income

 

When looking at the recent car parking income trends, the proposer and seconder did not consider it to be unreasonable to add £40,000 to the Council’s Base Budget.

 

In line with statutory requirements, a recorded vote was then undertaken on this part of the amendment.  The voting on this part was recorded as follows:

 

For the motion (12):    Cllrs Abbott, Baldry, Birch, Brazil, Hodgson, Jackson, Kemp, Long, McKay, O’Callaghan, Pannell and Sweett

 

Against the motion (17):  Cllrs Austen, Bastone, Brown, Chown, Foss, Hawkins, Holway, Hopwood, May, Pearce, Pennington, Pringle, Reeve, Rowe, Smerdon, Spencer and Taylor

 

Abstentions (0):  None.

 

Absent (2):  Cllrs Rose and Thomas

 

and the vote on this amendment was therefore declared LOST.

 

Adding to the Planning Application Income

 

The proposer advised that, following the joint Budget meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel and Development Management (DM) Committee, the views of the Head of Practice for DM had been taken into account and it was now proposed that only £15,000 be added to the Council’s Budget.

 

In debate, some Members felt that the Council should heed the advice of the lead officer and not add a speculative £15,000 into the Base Budget.

 

In line with statutory requirements, a recorded vote was then undertaken on this part of the amendment.  The voting on this part was recorded as follows:

 

For the motion (12):    Cllrs Abbott, Baldry, Birch, Brazil, Hodgson, Jackson, Kemp, Long, McKay, O’Callaghan, Pannell and Sweett

 

Against the motion (17):  Cllrs Austen, Bastone, Brown, Chown, Foss, Hawkins, Holway, Hopwood, May, Pearce, Pennington, Pringle, Reeve, Rowe, Smerdon, Spencer and Taylor

 

Abstentions (0):  None.

 

Absent (2):  Cllrs Rose and Thomas

 

and the vote on this amendment was therefore declared LOST.

 

Removal of the Proposed Economy Officer Post

 

Having viewed the proposed Job Description for the Post, the proposer and seconder were both of the view that the roles and responsibilities were too vast and regretted the lack of supporting targets and outcomes.

 

Other Members made reference to the Council’s Enterprise Theme that sat beneath the adopted Corporate Strategy and were of the view that there was a need for additional resource to support this recognised priority.

 

In line with statutory requirements, a recorded vote was then undertaken on this part of the amendment.  The voting on this part was recorded as follows:

 

For the motion (11):    Cllrs Abbott, Baldry, Brazil, Hodgson, Jackson, Kemp, Long, McKay, O’Callaghan, Pannell and Sweett

 

Against the motion (18):  Cllrs Austen, Bastone, Birch, Brown, Chown, Foss, Hawkins, Holway, Hopwood, May, Pearce, Pennington, Pringle, Reeve, Rowe, Smerdon, Spencer and Taylor

 

Abstentions (0):  None.

 

Absent (2):  Cllrs Rose and Thomas

 

and the vote on this amendment was therefore declared LOST.

 

During the subsequent discussion on the substantive motion, the following points were raised:-

 

(a)     There was widespread support expressed for the proposal to allocate £400,000 into an Emergency Climate Change Project Fund;

 

(b)     In reluctantly supporting the proposal to increase Council Tax by £5, a Member asked that the Communications Team explain the reason why this decision had been made in all of its external communications;

 

(c)     A number of Members felt that the draft budget setting process had been much more consensual than it had been in previous years.

 

In line with statutory requirements, a recorded vote was then undertaken on the substantive motion.  The voting on the motion was recorded as follows:

 

For the motion (29):    Cllrs Abbott, Austen, Baldry, Bastone, Birch, Brazil, Brown, Chown, Foss, Hawkins, Hodgson, Holway, Hopwood, Jackson, Kemp, Long, May, McKay, O’Callaghan, Pannell, Pearce, Pennington, Pringle, Reeve, Rowe, Smerdon, Spencer, Sweett and Taylor

 

Against the motion (0):

 

Abstentions (0):

 

Absent (2):  Cllrs Rose and Thomas

 

and the vote on the motion was therefore declared CARRIED.

 

It was then:

 

RESOLVED

 

1.       That Council Tax be increased by £5 (which equates to a Band D Council Tax of £170.42 for 2020/21, an increase of £5 per year or 10 pence per week).  This equates to a Council Tax Requirement of £6,562,617;

 

2.       That the financial pressures outlined in Appendix B of the presented agenda report (amounting to £1,600,640) be agreed;

 

3.       That the schedule of savings identified in Appendix B of the presented agenda report (totalling £904,877) be agreed;

 

4.       That the Collection Fund Surplus of £60,000 (as illustrated in Appendix B of the presented agenda report) be agreed;

 

5.       That agreement be given to the net contributions to Reserves (£117,843) being included within the Authority’s Budget (as set out in Appendix C of the presented agenda report).  (NB. this includes using £564,163 of New Homes Bonus funding to fund the 2020/21 Revenue Budget);

 

6.       That £400,000 of New Homes Bonus funding be used to set up an Emergency Climate Change Projects Earmarked Reserve, as set out within Section 2.20 of the Executive Revenue Budget Proposals Report on 6 February 2020;

 

7.       That the unallocated balance (currently £235,016) of New Homes Bonus (NHB) be transferred into the New Homes Bonus Earmarked Reserve, with its future use to be decided when more details are known about the Spending Review for 2021/22 and following a Government consultation document on a replacement scheme for NHB which will be published in the Spring of 2020;

 

8.       That an Economy Officer post (shared with West Devon Borough Council) be added to the staffing establishment for two years (as set out in Section 2.37 of the Executive report on 6 February 2020 on the Revenue Budget Proposals for 2020/21) be agreed;

 

9.       That Partnership funding levels be as set out within Section 2.38 of the Revenue Budget Proposals report to the Executive on 6 February 2020, with the addition of £10,000 to the South Hams CVS for 2020/21 only, subject to the organisation demonstrating that it meets the criteria set out at Section 2.38 of the Revenue Budget report, with the additional £3,000 required to be taken from Unearmarked Reserves in 2020/21;

 

10.    That delegated authority be given to the Section 151 Officer, in consultation with the Leader of Council and the lead Executive Member for Finance, to agree the final amount of New Homes Bonus funding for the Dartmoor National Park for 2020/21;

 

11.    That the Council should set its total net expenditure for 2020/21 at £9,410,672 (as shown in Appendix B of the presented agenda report);

 

12.    That the minimum level of the Unearmarked Revenue Reserves be maintained at £1,500,000 (as set out at Section 7 of the Revenue Budget report presented to the Executive meeting on 6 February 2020);

 

13.    That the level of Reserves (as set out within the Revenue Budget report presented to the Executive meeting on 6 February 2020) and the assessment of their adequacy and the robustness of budget estimates be noted.  (NB. this is a requirement of Part 2 of the Local Government Act 2003); and

 

14.    That delegated authority be given to the Section 151 Officer, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, to carry out a virement within the 2020-21 Budget, to increase both the partnership expenditure budget by £9,000 and the estates management income budget by £9,000 to reflect a commercial rate of rent for the Citizens Advice but also to ensure no loss of service provision to local residents.