Issue - decisions

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.