Issue - meetings

Report to follow.

Matter for Decision:  

The Officer’s report detailed the budget proposals which relate to this portfolio that are included in the Budget-Setting Report (BSR) 2014/15 to be considered at Strategy & Resources Scrutiny Committee on 20 January 2014.

Decision of Executive Councillor for Community Wellbeing:

The Executive Councillor resolved to:

Review of Charges:

     i.        Approve the proposed charges for this portfolio’s services and facilities, as shown in Appendix A of the Officer’s report.

Capital:

    ii.        Seek approval from the Executive to carry forward resources from 2013/14, as detailed in Appendix C of the Officer’s, to fund re-phased capital spending

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 regarding the Community Wellbeing Portfolio Revenue and Capital Budgets Proposals 2013/14 to 2017/18.

Some members expressed disappointment at the level of cuts being proposed for the Children and Young People’s Participation Service. The Executive Councillor stated that the savings were necessary and were not a reflection on the quality of the work of the team. She also stated that even after the savings, the provision was still generous when compared to other authorities.

Concerns were raised about increased charges proposed for the Village Centre in Cherry Hinton and questioned how the rates had been arrived at. Officers explained that rises were inflation driven and were then rounded up or down to what was considered reasonable.

The Committee questioned the withdrawal of the S106 funding element of the Splashpacks scheme. The Sport and Recreation Manager confirmed that this had gone out for tenders but none of the tenders met the requirements of the S106 regulations. Therefore this element of the proposal had been withdrawn and the allocated funding had been returned to the Area Committee budgets for re-allocation.

The Executive Councillor reminded the Committee that many of the services in the portfolio should be viewed as commercial and therefore, it was reasonable to expect users of those services to cover the costs.

The Committee resolved by 4 votes to 0 to endorse the recommendations.

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

Not applicable.