Agenda item

Report number: COU/WS/23/003

Council considered this report, which presented the proposals for budget and council tax setting in 2023 to 2024 and the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2023 to 2027.

 

West Suffolk Council had an exemplary track record in robust financial management which had meant it continued to deliver high quality services as well as meeting the strategic vision of the authority.

 

This was despite a series of challenges. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic which had not only reduced income (Government policy had been that councils created income to supplement reduction in national funding) but also costs to the Council in playing its role to support communities and businesses. All UK authorities were now facing tough financial challenges caused by issues such as soaring inflation, cost of living and energy prices, the war in Ukraine and changes to the way communities spend which reduced income. National finances had been reduced significantly over the last decade for local councils and added burdens had been placed on authorities too during this time.

 

The 2023 to 2024 budget had been created not only to be balanced and sustainable but as an investment in the priorities of the district’s residents and businesses. It was designed to make the communities of West Suffolk greener, healthier and more prosperous.

 

Members considered the report in detail, which included the following issues for securing a balanced budget for 2023 to 2024 and plans for the medium term from 2023 to 2027, together with corresponding detailed appendices:

 

Section 1:    Summary: which included reference to continuing investments in a range of initiatives to meet priorities; continuing to concentrate on the Council’s health and wellbeing agenda; the inclusion of an additional £240,000 investment per annum in the waste and grounds maintenance team, together with a £1.3 million (2023 to 2027) for capital investment in parks, open spaces, heritage and other attractions. 

Section 2:    Context: which included reference to the Council’s robust financial planning and management enabling the Council to deliver both services and the strategic aims of West Suffolk despite the pressures on local government finances; the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Council’s finances, including the role of the Council in supporting residents and businesses throughout the pandemic; the medium term budget plans (beyond April 2024) being prepared in the context of significant uncertainties around the current economic climate and Government policy; ‘Investing in our Growth Agenda’; the Council’s transformation programme; and further detail on the Council’s plans to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2030.

Section 3:    Local government finance settlement: which included reference to the Revenue Support Grant; Rural Services Delivery Grant; Services Grant; the future of New Homes Bonus; the new Funding Guarantee Grant; business rates and business rates reliefs; Retail, Hospitality and Leisure Relief and Supporting Small Business Relief; Local Authority Housing Fund; Collection Fund deficits and council tax referendum limits.

Section 4:    Council tax for 2023 to 2024: which included reference to changes to the Long Term Empty Property Premium and Second Homes arrangements 

Section 5:    Setting the budget – 2023 to 2024 and across the medium term to 2026 to 2027:which included reference to inflation assumptions assumed in the MTFS; fees and charges (as approved by Cabinet on 7 February 2023); and delivering a sustainable future beyond 2023 to 2024.

Section 6:    Capital programme 2023 to 2027: which included reference to the planned capital expenditure over four years to 2026/2027; and disposal of surplus assets.

Section 7:    Minimum revenue provision (MRP)

Section 8:    General fund balance

Section 9:    Earmarked reserves

Section 10: Strategic priorities and MTFS reserve

Section 11: Adequacy of reserves

Section 12:  Calculation of the council tax

 

Having acknowledged the issues highlighted above, Council noted that currently, council tax made up approximately one fifth of the authority’s budget (exclusive of housing benefit) and therefore only contributed to a fifth of service delivery. West Suffolk Council charged around eleven percent of a local council tax payer’s bill with the rest comprising precepts from the County Council, Police and Crime Commissioner as well as the relevant Parish or Town Council. It was recognised that any increase provided an extra burden on taxpayers but did mean the protection of vital services which would otherwise possibly have to be considered for reductions. Councillors were asked and expected by Government to look at local taxation levels to meet the authority’s financial needs to support its communities and help future proof from financial uncertainty.

 

To help secure a balanced budget for 2023 to 2024, on 7 February 2023, the Cabinet recommended to Council that the level of Band D council tax for 2023 to 2024 be set at £192.06, which represented a Band D weekly increase of just under 10 pence. Noting that just over 70 percent of West Suffolk residents were in bands A to C, these would actually see a lower increase. This increase was still below the expectation from Government for a greater rise in council tax up to three percent for district councils.

 

Councillor Broughton drew relevant issues to the attention of Council, including commending the finance team and the Performance and Audit Scrutiny Committee, together with staff and other members across the authority for their work in securing a balanced budget for 2023 to 2024 and for developing plans in the medium term. Councillor Broughton duly summarised the extensive work that had been undertaken to reach this point and the key proposals that contributed to securing a balanced budget for 2023 to 2024 and their significance in planning for the medium term.

 

A detailed debate ensued which included a number of comments, observations and questions, including:

 

a.       Achievement of a two year balanced budget: by remaining with West Suffolk’s council tax plans debated last year, this had avoided the need to propose a higher rise in council tax as suggested by Government.

 

b.       Support for communities and businesses: Comments highlighted included the previously agreed £500,000 investment by the Council and partners to help reduce council tax by 100 percent for a year for eligible persons; support for keeping swimming pools open where many across the country were closing; and other investments in health and wellbeing.  

 

c.       Western Way project: Specific reference was given to Attachment A, ‘Revenue budget summary’ which presently, years three and four indicated significant budget deficits. Whilst the initial aspirations for the Western Way development had been scaled down to a project largely centred on the replacement of the leisure centre, the Labour Group remained concerned that the Council should not be spending large sums on this project in the present economic climate and national financial uncertainties. A refurbishment of the existing leisure centre remained the preferred option for the Labour Group and with a planning application submitted for a David Lloyd leisure facility at nearby Marham Park, it was anticipated that whilst such a facility, if approved, might be unaffordable for some, this may impact on the services offered by Abbeycroft Leisure. It was considered that the Western Way project remained a huge investment for one area of Bury St Edmunds and the Council should be looking to invest in health and wellbeing that covered a wider area of the district.

 

It was commented separately whether the proposed swimming pool for the new leisure centre was of sufficient size to support national competitions and the wider economic benefits that the holding of competitions would potentially bring to the town. It was commented that this matter might continue to be challenged as the project progressed.   

 

During her right of reply, Councillor Broughton stated that the Western Way project review had been considered by Council on 13 December 2022 and subject to gateway reviews, safeguards and financial tests, Council had approved a number of recommendations to enable the project to proceed in accordance with the updated business case, which set out the financial case for a new build over the refurbishment option of the existing site. It was therefore felt not appropriate to reopen the debate on this matter at this time. 

 

d.       Protecting the vulnerable: it was commented that this budget was of sound financial base to enable the Council to help those in need with particular reference given to the provision of additional temporary accommodation and more affordable homes in the district. 

 

e.       Supporting economic growth and prosperity: it was commented that this budget demonstrated that West Suffolk remained attractive for businesses to invest, which included a pioneering, innovative vertical farm project in Newmarket which had received financial support from private investors and a loan from the New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership. Other examples included the Council’s support to providing the incubation units on Suffolk Business Park, Bury St Edmunds; the ongoing progress of the Council’s housing company, Barley Homes; support towards raising skills and opportunities; the Council-owned solar farm and the successful ‘solar for business scheme’.

 

f.       West Suffolk Council: reference was given to the positive achievements since the creation of West Suffolk Council as a result of prudent financial budgeting and planning. Examples included successful investments made; support for the vulnerable and those in need; commercial efficiencies made; as well as continuing to deliver vital services.  

 

g.       Parks, leisure and energy saving solutions: Support was given to the proposed £1.3 million (2023 to 2027) for the capital investment in open spaces, parks, museums and other leisure attractions, and the continuation of the £9 million investment in measures to support the Council in reaching carbon net zero by 2030. However, disappointment was expressed that no investment had been made specifically to better insulate homes or, noting that a commuted sum was anticipated to emanate from the Tayfen Road development in due course, to upgrade the play area provision in the Abbey Gardens, Bury St Edmunds.

 

During her right of reply, Councillor Broughton stated that eligible residents could apply for separate Government funding to better insulate their homes; and refurbishment of the play area in Abbey Gardens would be forthcoming soon.

 

It was separately commented that this budget continued to enable free leisure facilities to be provided in local wards such as Moreton Hall. The provision of the recent splash play park in this ward was mentioned. In addition, it was separately commented that provision of leisure facilities, whether free or not, should be promoted and encouraged in local areas if they were to help improve the health and wellbeing of the community. 

 

h.       Brandon and specifically, street lighting:Members sympathised with the frustrations regarding the environmental challenges that had historically restricted housing development in the locality and extensive work was being undertaken to try and overcome these obstacles. Further concerns were expressed regarding the provision of £40 million to replace Bury St Edmunds Leisure Centre when it was felt it could be refurbished. It was felt by some members that the proposed budget did not make provision to address a perceived disparity between funding of street lighting by town, parish, district and county councils in the areas of the former Forest Heath District and St Edmundsbury Borough Councils was reiterated.

 

          During her right of reply, Councillor Broughton stated that it would cost approximately £25 million to refurbish the leisure centre and this would only extend its life by about 20 years at which point the costs to rebuild would have escalated considerably. The existing pool would also need to be closed for up to two years whilst work took place. On street lights, as previously explained, West Suffolk Council was working with Suffolk County Council, as the authority with the responsibility for the majority of street lighting provision, and town and parish councils, to examine this complex historic issue in more detail, in accordance with the recent decision of Cabinet.

 

i.        Families and Communities: This area remained a strategic priority of the Council and recognition was given to the work undertaken with partners, town and parish councils, and other key stakeholders to help improve the lives of residents in the community. Examples were provided, including that it was being proposed that the 2023 to 2024 budget should continue to include significant allocations for the provision of Community Chest and councillor locality budget funding for granting to organisations and groups striving to make a difference in their communities.

 

j.        Working with partners:it was commented that this budget would enable the Council to continue to work with partners such as Suffolk County Council and Suffolk Public Sector Leaders to achieve ambitious projects, make sound investments and support the vulnerable and those in need.

 

k.       Operations service: Recognition was given to the waste and street scene service, the Civil Parking Enforcement team and how this budget would enable £440,000 to be allocated towards making improvements to car parks located in Bury St Edmunds, Newmarket and new provision in Clare.

 

l.        Performance and Audit Scrutiny Committee (PASC): Recognition was given to the significant work of PASC in considering and scrutinising numerous documents before making its recommendations to Cabinet as part of the budget setting process.

 

m.      Leisure Asset Management Breakdown: Councillor Burns referred to page 99 of the agenda report pack, which was Attachment D Appendix 2b, ‘2023 to 2024 Capital Programme – Leisure Asset Management Plan Breakdown’. He firstly asked whether reference to Motts Field, Haverhill Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) should be removed and the play area refurbished as it was presently stated the other way round. He then requested whether an indication could be given on the document regarding what leisure/sport/play area improvements had been funded by Section 106 contributions.

 

          A written response would be provided following the meeting by Councillor Broughton and Councillor Joanna Rayner, Portfolio Holder for Leisure, Culture and Community Hubs. In accordance with the Constitution, this response would be circulated to all members and published on the Council’s website.

 

In summary, the majority of members acknowledged that despite the significant financial challenges being faced, the Council had made, and were continuing to make, successful investments in services; growth; greener; and health and well-being projects; together with creating efficiencies, resilience and ensuring the effective management of resources, all of which and more would enable West Suffolk Council to secure a balanced budget for 2023 to 2024.

 

The motion was then put to the statutorily required recorded vote.  With 53 members present, the votes recorded were 45 votes for the motion, 8 against, and no abstentions; the names of those members voting for and against, being recorded as follows:

 

For the motion:

Councillors Alecock, Augustine, Broughton, Simon Brown, Tony Brown, Bull, Burns, Chester, Chung, Nick Clarke, Cole, Drummond, Everitt, Frost, Glossop, Griffiths, Harvey, Beccy Hopfensperger, Paul Hopfensperger, Houlder, Lay, Luccarini, Mager, Marks, Mason, Mildmay-White, Nobbs, Noble, Palmer, Pugh, Rayner, Richardson, Roach, Rout, Rushbrook, Shipp, Andrew Smith, Soons, Springett, Stamp, Stanbury, Stevens, Thompson, Thorndyke and Wakelam.

 

Against the motion:

Councillors Crooks, Hanlon, Hind, Lukaniuk, Neal, David Smith, Waldron and Wittam.

 

Abstentions:

None

 

It was therefore

 

Resolved:

 

1.       Having taken into account the information received by Cabinet on 7 February 2023 (Report number: CAB/WS/23/008) including the report by the Director (Resources and Property) (Section 151 Officer) set out in Attachment C, together with the up to date information and advice contained in Report number: COU/WS/23/003, the level of West Suffolk Council’s band D council tax for 2023 to 2024 be set at £192.06 (the level of council tax beyond 2023 to 2024 will be set in accordance with the annual budget process for the relevant financial year).

 

2.       Subject to recommendation 1. above, the following formal council tax resolutions be adopted:

 

a.       the revenue and capital budget for 2023 to 2027, attached at Attachment A to Report number: COU/WS/23/003, and as detailed in Attachment D (Appendices 1 to 6), Attachment E and Attachment F be approved.

 

b.       A general fund balance of £5 million be agreed to be maintained, as detailed in paragraph 8.2.

 

c.       The statutory calculations under Section 30 to 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, attached at Attachment I, be noted.

 

d.       The Suffolk County Council and Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Suffolk precepts issued to West Suffolk Council, in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 and outlined at paragraphs 12.6 and 12.7 below, be noted.

 

e.       In accordance with Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, the amounts shown in Schedule D of Attachment H be agreed as the amount of Council Tax for the year 2023 to 2024 for each of the categories of dwellings shown.

 

3.       The Director (Resources and Property), in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Resources and Property, be authorised to vire funds between existing Earmarked Reserves (as set out at Attachment D, Appendix 3) as deemed appropriate throughout the medium term financial planning period.

 

4.       Approval be given to delegate authority to the Director (Resources and Property) in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Resources and Property to formulate and implement in full, Government grant, discount or relief schemes (examples include but not limited to those set out in paragraphs 3.13 to 3.19 and 4.7 to 4.9), so long as they are as a minimum, revenue cost neutral to the Council.

 

5.       Approval be given to the change to the Long Term Empty Property Premium set out in paragraphs 4.10 to 4.13, and to the further class of property not attracting the premium set out in paragraph 4.12.

 

6.       Endorsement be given to Cabinet’s approval of the fees and charges price increases (as set out in Attachment D appendix 6a).

 

7.       Approval be given to the Flexible Use of Capital Receipts Strategy (as set out in Attachment F).