Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
Minutes:
Matter for
Decision
The Officer’s
report presented a summary of the 2014/15 outturn position (actual income and
expenditure) for services within the City Centre & Public Places Portfolio,
compared to the current budget for the year. The position for revenue and
capital was reported and variances from budgets highlighted, together with
explanations. Requests to carry forward funding arising from certain budget
underspends into 2015/16 were identified.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for City Centre and Public Places
i.
Agreed the carry forward requests,
totalling £78,300 as detailed in Appendix C of the Officer’s report, be
recommended to Council for approval.
ii.
Agreed to seek approval from Council
to fund re-phased net capital spending of £973,000 in respect of capital
schemes.
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 Senior Accountant.
In response to Members’ questions the Director of Environment said the
following:
i.
Some reasons for capital variance (ie the
difference between outturn and final budgets) were set out in Appendix D of the
Officer’s report.
ii.
There had been some variance with environmental
improvement projects due to the large number of small scale projects that
needed to be delivered, this had caused a backlog. The situation had been
exacerbated by staff turnover.
iii.
There had been on-going capital variance over a
period of years. A report was being taken to Strategy and Resources Scrutiny
Committee 13 July 2015 setting out mitigation suggestions.
iv.
Issues regarding s106 delivery (Appendix D) had
been raised with the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport
plus Opposition Spokesperson; they had now been resolved.
The Executive Councillor for City Centre and Public Places undertook to
liaise with Councillors at a briefing with Officers if they had any specific
queries regarding projects with capital budgets. The Committee welcomed this
proposal. Councillor Baigent specifically asked for information regarding
PR030e - 38258 Cavendish Rd (Mill Rd end) improvements to seating, paving and
public art (S106), PR030h – 38255 Romsey 'town square' public realm
improvements (S106) and PR030f – 38259 Bath House Play Area improvements
(S106).
In response to Members’ questions the Senior Accountant said the
following:
i.
The project variance fund filled the gap between original
budgeted figures and the actual final cost.
ii.
The fund was set up to distribute capital so any
unused monies were returned to the general fund. Officers had delegated
authority to action this.
Councillor Reid asked for specific details in future Officer reports to
explain budget variances between ‘original’ and ‘final’ budget figures. She
also asked for a review of report figures/format in future so councillors could
scrutinise non-technical reasons for variance. Councillor Sinnott suggested
that the Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee would be a more appropriate
forum to look at variances. The Executive Councillor for City Centre and Public
Places said a number of variances had occurred due to rebasing issues (eg the
Community, Arts and Recreation budget becoming the Communities budget), which
were not expected to arise again in future. The Senior Accountant said the Head
of Finance was looking at ways to amend the report to explain significant
variances if they arose again in future. Should variances occur due to major
savings/costs, these would be reported in the Mid-Year Financial Review or
Budget Setting Report. There were none for the City Centre and Public Places
Portfolio in 2014/15. Councillor Reid re-iterated her point that the variance process
needed to be transparent in order for Opposition Councillors to scrutinise it.
The Executive Councillor for City Centre and Public Places undertook to liaise
with the Head of Finance regarding the format of reports.
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.