Venue: Meeting Room G.01, Ground Floor, City Hall, 115 Charles Street, Leicester, LE1 1FZ
Contact: Anita Patel Scrutiny Policy Officer, email Anita.Patel@leicester.gov.uk
Katie Jordan, Democratic Support Officer, tel: 0116 4542616, Email: Katie.Jordan@leicester.gov.uk
Items
| No. |
Item |
43. |
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Minutes:
Apologies for absence were received from Cllr
Cutkelvin.
|
44. |
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Minutes:
Members were asked to declare any interests
they may have had in the
business to be discussed.
Councillors Aldred, Dawood and Singh-Johal
declared that they were members of Council-run gyms.
These declarations were made during the item
on the Draft Capital Programme.
|
45. |
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING PDF 157 KB
The minutes of The Culture and Neighbourhoods Scrutiny
Commission held on 5 December 2023 are attached and Members are asked to
confirm them as a correct record.
Minutes:
AGREED:
That the minutes of the meeting of the Culture and Neighbourhoods Scrutiny
Commission held on 5 December 2023 be confirmed as a correct record.
|
46. |
CHAIRS ANNOUNCEMENTS
|
47. |
QUESTIONS, REPRESENTATIONS AND STATEMENTS OF CASE
The Monitoring Officer to report on any questions,
representations and statements of case received in accordance with Council
procedures.
Minutes:
The Monitoring Officer reported that none had
been received.
|
48. |
PETITIONS
Minutes:
The Monitoring Officer reported that none had
been received.
|
49. |
DRAFT GENERAL REVENUE BUDGET PDF 1 MB
The Director of Finance submits a report detailing the
proposed Revenue
Budget for 2024/25.
Minutes:
The Director of Finance submitted a report
detailing the proposed Revenue Budget for 2024/25.
The Chair directed the Commission to the
relevant parts of the document to Culture and Neighbourhoods.
The Head of Finance (CDN) then presented the
report.
Key points included:
- The budget was very challenging for the
2024/25 financial year and was the worst outlook that the Council had ever
faced.
- Without drastic action, the Council would not
be able to balance the budget in the 2025/26 financial year.
- A Section 114 notice would not mean that the
Council was bankrupt, as Councils cannot technically go bankrupt. A Section 114 notice would state that
the Council’s resources could not meet its commitments and as such it
could mean a freeze on commitments and government interventions.
- Many other Councils were in a similar position
to Leicester.
- Whilst not directly linked to Culture and
Neighbourhoods, a growth in statutory services had put pressure on the
budget, for example, the costs of Adult and Children’s Social Care, pressure
on home-to-school transport and the homelessness budget.
- The budget was in a volatile position and
there was expected to be a need to add a further £11m to the final budget,
largely due to an increase in minimum wage which had raised care costs and
homelessness.
- The growth in statutory services and the
failure of the government to provide adequate funding had meant it was
difficult for local authorities to keep up. Despite pressures and inflation
increasing since 2021, the government had only just announced additional
finding for local governments, however, this may only amount to around £3m
for Leicester City Council.
- There was £10m of savings in the budget, but
this still left a large sum to be met from the reserves.
- A further austerity drive from the government
was signalled from 2025-26.
Analysis from the Institute of Fiscal Studies showed that there
would be a real-terms cut of 3.4% per year for services other than the
NHS, aid and defence.
- The Council approach to budget reductions had
been to use a managed reserves strategy, however, the proposed budget
would make use of all reserves available.
- Some local authorities had been offered exceptional
financial support from the government which in some cases allowed them to
use the proceeds from the sale of assets to balance the revenue budget,
and in some cases allowed councils to increase their council tax above the
5% permitted. However, no local
authority had been offered extra money.
No exceptional financial support would be offered to Leicester City
Council in 24/25 as it was able to balance the budget.
The Committee were invited to ask questions
and make comments. Key points included:
- The situation was expected, and it was
possible that many services would be cut or lost. The Council was doing what it could with
what it had.
- The Council were doing everything possible to
deliver services and statutory duties.
It was noted that people in need of statutory duties such as social
care also benefitted from ... view the full minutes text for item 49.
|
50. |
DRAFT CAPITAL PROGRAMME PDF 872 KB
The Director of Finance submits a report which details the
Capital Programme
for 2024/25.
Minutes:
The Director of Finance submitted a report detailing
the proposed Capital Programme for 2024/25.
The Chair directed the Commission to the relevant parts of the document
to Culture and Neighbourhoods.
Key points included:
- This was a
one-year programme of schemes from grants, borrowing and the sale of
assets. The programme was limited
to one-year due to the uncertainty of resources, the impact of inflation
and to ease pressure on revenue budgets.
- The
Commission were given a rundown of expenditure relevant to Culture and
Neighbourhoods, including:
- £1 million
for leisure centre refurbishment.
- £200,000
for Park Depot relocation.
- £48,000
for the relocation of the pest and dogs depot.
- £245,000
for grounds maintenance equipment rendered.
- £300,000
for the community garden gardens and allotments through the Growing
Spaces project.
- £195,000
for heritage interpretation panels
- £75,000
for historic building grants.
- £50,000
for festival decorations.
- The
operational estate Maintenance Programme would help to maintain buildings
out of which services operate.
The Committee were invited to ask questions and make comments. Key
points included:
- In response
to a query about potentially trying to empower local organisations with
the knowledge and experience needed to take over and/or run assets, it was
noted that there was a fundamental branch review of everything in the
Council and the use of community organisations was a part of this.
- Further to
this it was raised that if assets were sold off then that would result in
a one-off payment to the Council, whereas if they were held by the Council
and leased to organisation then the Council would hold the asset whilst
also raising revenue. In response
to this it was noted that prior to any decision on asset sale, there would
be consideration given to leasing.
- It was
noted that in terms of service provision, it was sometimes possible for
the third sector to help to deliver services on behalf of the Council, an
example of this was the African Caribbean Centre where involvement with
the voluntary sector had saved the council around £150,000 per year. Additionally, there were many third
sector groups that showed potential to work with the Council and they were
being encouraged to come forward as the Council were keen to work with
them. Consideration was being given
to whether such groups could be supported long-term, perhaps with a view
to them eventually running a service (perhaps on behalf of the Council,
however, this would take time.
Additionally, before an asset went on the market, it was considered
as to whether it could be run by a community group.
- The
University of Leicester was being worked with to help understand the
potential of community groups working with the Council.
- It was
noted that Leicester’s Shared Prosperity Fund programme funded a bid from
the University of Leicester to work with social enterprises in the city to
develop business plans, organisational capacity and skills. Additionally, there was another £350k from
the SPF programme for bids from Community Asset Transfer organisations.
This could support investment in buildings for energy ... view the full minutes text for item 50.
|
51. |
WORK PROGRAMME PDF 320 KB
The current version of the Work Programme is attached.
Members of the Commission will be asked to forward any item
they wish to
consider on the work programme for the Commission to the
Chair or the
Governance Services Officer.
Minutes:
Members of the Commission were invited to
consider content of the work programme and were invited to make suggestions for
additions as appropriate to be brought to future meetings.
It was noted that the next meeting of the
commission was likely to be postponed until April.
It was noted that the task group on Ward
Community Funding had met for the first time in January and would meet again in
February.
The work programme was noted.
|
52. |
ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
Minutes:
There being no further items of urgent
business, the meeting finished at 18:18.
|