Issue - meetings

Matter for Decision

The report presented an overview of the impact of the Coronavirus emergency in the Spring of 2020 on Cambridge City Council’s budget for 2020/21. It set out how estimates had been made and the uncertainties within those estimates. It lists the financial support that central government has provided to the council and proposes several actions that the council can take to balance its budget in 2020/21.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Finance and Resources to recommend to Council to:

      i.         Note the forecast impact of the Covid-19 crisis on the council’s finances.

    ii.         Approve changes to the 2020/21 GF revenue and capital budgets as set out in Section 7 and Appendices 1 and 2 of the officer’s report.

   iii.         Approve the use of earmarked reserves, as set out in Section 7 and Appendix 3 of the officer’s report.

  iv.         Note the revised savings requirements identified in Section 8 of the officer’s report.

 

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 Head of Finance.

 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:

      i.         Asked what priorities were being set and what the areas were that the council might stop spending on.

    ii.         Questioned if the council was looking to make cuts before they were required. What processes were in place to reverse these cuts if government funding came through to the council.

   iii.         Questioned what the process for was reviewing the reserve target if required.

  iv.         Questioned if funding had been cut in the right areas.

    v.         Stated it was clear why some projects had been cancelled, others had been set as lower priority or cut and do not need to be completed this year. However, there needed to be a clear definition between the two as it was not clear for all the projects referenced, the reason why this decision had been taken and by who. This information was required to undertake accurate scrutiny before the next meeting of full council.

  vi.         It was important the public sector invested and spent finances to support the local economy especially as there was a prospect of additional government funding designed to support local authorities’ loss of income. The council were able to do just this. 

 vii.         The council had stopped work at a time when the community and local economy needed it most, if the projects stopped it could be too late to reverse the decision.

viii.         Noted there was a few partnerships working projects (notably the Greater Cambridge Partnership) where funding cuts had been made.  Questioned if these projects had been postponed as those partners had decided they could not be delivered due to COVID-19, or had they been negotiated with both parties or was it the council’s decision.

  ix.         Asked for the status on the youth liaison officer.

 

The Executive Councillor for Finance and Resources said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.         Items that had been retained in the budget were anti-poverty, climate change, biodiversity, homelessness to maintain these services during this difficult time.

    ii.         There had been items which had been deferred until the following year as the work could not be carried out during the pandemic; other deferred items had been retained in the budget while others would be considered in the new year if financially viable.

   iii.         The next round of government funding which had recently been announced amounted to £500 million for local authorities to cover additional expenditure which met certain criteria. There would not be assistance with property income losses.

  iv.          With regards to car parking, the council would have to pay the first 5% of the losses and the government three quarters of the remainder. This could give approximately £2 million if the council met all conditions, however, detailed guidance was not yet available.

    v.         Funding from government received on homelessness amounted to £24,750 (additional cost to the council was £1.2million).

  vi.         In total a £1.3million grant had been received to date.

 vii.         If government funding were more than anticipated, it would be possible to review the council’s reserves and adjust the figures again.

viii.         Stated there were far more imponderables on the income side and reminded the committee there would be no assistance with the commercial property incomes. There was a variety of fees across the council which needed to be recovered across the council. It was uncertain if these costs would recover from government and the council would have to pay the first 5%.

  ix.         Projects postponed were capital schemes funded from revenue, therefore these could be moved back and forth from one year to the next without much issue if the work could be completed.

    x.         Acknowledged there were some climate change and biodiversity items which had been deferred but much of these works could not be restarted this year. The doubling of the wildflower meadows should already be completed.

  xi.         The council had planned to spend £100,000 on its tree programme, but this funding had been spread over a longer period.

 xii.         As the government had agreed a further tranche of funding to the GCP and the council did not have the financial resources available, it seemed sensible the contribution to the GCP could be reduced without hindering the work they were undertaking.

xiii.         The amount of money that the council allocated to the GCP was related to the new homes bonus which had been reduced.

xiv.         Could not provide a response to the query regarding the youth liaison officer but would ask that this was provided outside of the meeting.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to:

      i.         Note the forecast impact of the Covid-19 crisis on the council’s finances.

The Committee resolved 4 votes to 0 to:                        

    ii.         Approve changes to the 2020/21 GF revenue and capital budgets as set out in Section 7 and Appendices 1 and 2 of the officer’s report.

The Committee unanimously resolved to:                         

   iii.         Approve the use of earmarked reserves, as set out in Section 7 and Appendix 3 of the officer’s report.

 

 

The Committee resolved 4 votes to 0 to:                        

  iv.         Note the revised savings requirements identified in Section 8 of the officer’s report.

 

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.