Agenda item

There will be a brief presentation outlining the current situation with regard to the City Council budget and some details about the effects of forthcoming budget reductions.

Jerry Connolly, Member Support Officer gave the meeting an overview presentation on matters relating to the current Council budget process.

-          Details were given about government cuts which had meant there was a need for Council budget cuts on a large scale.

-          Jerry outlined what the cuts would mean for the city, such as the cancellation of city centre regeneration projects.

-          It was noted that the Council received it’s funding. This was mostly from Government grants; also he explained how its expenditure was divided up for different services.

-          Details were provided of the measures which were being undertaken by the Council, such as looking at which areas to cut and the impact that would be faced.

-          In summary, Jerry noted that the Council had no choice but to make cuts, which would have a major impact on services across the city, but were seeking to protect the most vulnerable people.

Following the presentation Councillor Dempster made a number of points

-          Due to the number of lower rateable value houses in the city, the city received a comparably lower amount of its funding from Council tax, compared to other areas, such as Leicestershire.

-          Details of funding from the government had been received late and information has been incomplete.

-          A large amount of preparation and actions had already been undertaken in anticipation of these cuts.

-          The main focus was making reductions on back office functions and reviewing the numbers of support staff – whilst protecting frontline services.

-          Also being considered was the merger of services where there was overlap and using buildings for more than one service, such as happened at Barleycroft School.

Councillor Westley also made the following points, mainly with regard to housing:-

-          The government were now clawing back large amounts of rental income, as ‘negative subsidy’.

-          The government were also requiring Councils to increase rents at an average of 6.8%, but the City Council keeping this level to 5.9% and a commitment to maintaining the decent homes standard, which the government had removed.

-          Details were currently being considered with regard to the Government’s planned five year tenancies.

-          He noted that a number of other rules were being changed, such as the age increase from 25 to 35, for new single tenants, being able to claim housing benefit levels for a flat, rather than a room in shared house.

-          As Cabinet Lead, he had taken a decision to the expenditure of some local capital funding at Community Meetings.

-          As a result of the changes to housing rules, it was felt that homelessness would rise in the city.

Residents asked questions / made comments about the following matters:-

The government wanted people to take more responsibility for their areas, but would grants still be available to support initiatives?

In housing, it was noted that Supporting People and Supporting Tenants and Residents funding had been stopped, but the city Council was considering whether such support could be continued.

The Council used to receive large amounts of funding from the government in the form of grants for specific tasks. These had recently been joined up together and significantly reduced overall.

More details were requested about the change to single person tenancies.

The new rules meant that the age had been extended, from 25 to 35. This was for any new single person tenancy to be able to claim housing benefit for a flat, rather than a room in a shared property. Existing tenancies would not be affected

A resident felt that there were inefficiencies at the Council relating to the mixed ownership of land / buildings between different parts of the Council. It meant that the responsibility for maintenance and cleaning was often confused and it was difficult to get work done.

City Warden Manager, Barbara Whitcombe commented that she and her staff also felt that this was a problem, noting that different parts of the Council had separate budgets for cleaning, which was a problem.

Councillor Dempster commented that this issue of re-charging was being looked at as it caused Councillors confusion as well. It was however a very complicated issue to tackle.

A resident raised the issue of a hedge around the Bennion Pools area which needed cutting back for security reasons. He said that the Parks services said that it was Highways who were responsible for the hedge. Highways however said that they could not afford to cut the hedge back, but wouldn’t let a private contractor undertake the work on behalf of the friends of Bennion Pools.

It was requested that the Member Support Officer look into this matter.

With regard to five year tenancies for Council properties – what would happen at the end of the tenancy?

It was thought that the tenants would be assessed for their suitability to remain in the property, if for example children had left the home, it was likely that they would be required to move. Also if they could afford to buy a house, they would probably be expected to do so. The details of these arrangements had not yet been made clear though.