Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Decision details
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Open Spaces and City Services
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: Yes
Is subject to call in?: No
To
approve the following, where relevant:
a) Revenue carry forward requests 2016/17 to 2017/18.
b) Capital carry forward requests from 2016/17 to
2017/18 to fund rephased net capital spending.
Matter for
Decision
The Officer’s
report presented for the Streets & Open Spaces Portfolio:
i.
A summary of actual income and expenditure compared
to the final budget for 2016/17 (outturn position).
ii.
Revenue and capital budget variances with
explanations.
iii.
Specific requests to carry forward funding
available from budget underspends into 2017/18.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Streets & Open Spaces
Approved carry forward
requests:
i.
Totalling £41,140 revenue funding from 2016/17 to
2017/18, as detailed in Appendix C of the Officer’s report.
ii.
Of £728k capital resources from 2016/17 to 2017/18
to fund rephased net capital spending, as detailed in
Appendix D.
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny
Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Principal Accountant (Services).
In response to Councillor Austin’s question the Principal Accountant (Services) said £200,000 of funds were allocated to the
University Arms for phased work over a period of years until 2017-18.
In response to
Councillor Austin’s question the Executive Councillor said:
i.
Historic Environmental Improvement Programme (EIP)
projects were delayed due to delivery issues from third parties. It was
considered better to delay the projects and get them right rather than rush
them. Newer EIP projects were delivered faster as they were not reliant on
third parties. Delays were not caused by staff capacity issues
ii.
Rephased/uncommitted
funding would go back to area committees for reallocation. It was hoped
historic problems would not lead to funding being carried over into the next
financial year.
iii.
Area Committees would be given guidance on how to
select faster delivery projects. In July they would also receive information on
projects seeking funding and budgets available.
The Head of Environmental Services said
there had been uptake issues for area committees as projects were not coming
forward to seek funding, so some was not allocated. This would carry over if
not allocated.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.
The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor
(and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Publication date: 04/09/2017
Date of decision: 29/06/2017