Meeting documents

To sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 4 October 2016

The Minutes of the meeting held on 4 October 2016  were agreed and signed by the Chairman.

There were no declarations of interest.

It was noted that on the Chiltern & South Bucks Joint Committee forward plan, it was stated that there was a consultation about the Community Infrastructure Levy on 16 November 2016.  In fact there had only been a mention that this item would be discussed later on 7 December 2016 and a request was made for the table to be amended to reflect clarify this point.

Cabinet would be receiving an update on the Amersham Multi-Storey Car Park project on 13 December 2016 and then the full business case would come to Resources Overview Committee on 31 January 2017.  The Members discussed whether this was adequate time for discussion before the Cabinet decision on 7 February 2016.  Similarly, the Chiltern Pools Feasibility study was due to go to Services Overview Committee and Members wanted to discuss this also.  It was advised that it would come to the Committee once the business case stage was reached.  The Chairman requested that the Cabinet Member be invited to attend the next Resources Committee to give a position statement.

Noting the Chiltern Car Park Review to be discussed at Cabinet, it was suggested that a meeting was organised with Chiltern Railways to co-ordinate with their car park increases.  It was advised that these proposed increases had been postponed until January.

A request had been made for further clarification surrounding the performance indicator results reported.

Working days lost due to sickness absence

The target for short-term sickness for 2016/17 was 5 and for long term sickness absence was 3 but the overall target was 10 days.  The reason the target remains at 10 is because this figure takes into account real data for 2015/16 and nationally published data and as such the target is 10 but we will aim to reduce this in the future. The targets for long and short term sickness data were based on indicative data which is why they do not equal the overall target.

Processing of planning applications

The target for processing within 8 weeks had not been met in Q1 but had been recently much improved. 

Members had asked why there were gaps in the statistics produced for the net additional homes provided and this was advised to be due to staff shortages and work pressures caused by the production of the local plan.

A further question was asked regarding the Waste Customer Satisfaction results.  It was noted that the figures included the Wycombe area and so there was a request for more details for the Chiltern area.  Members also considered that Serco was not fulfilling all its contract duties regarding street cleaning particularly during the leaf fall period and litter bin emptying.  It was requested that a report be brought to a future Services Overview meeting for an update.

RESOLVED

To note the report and request that the Head of Environment provide a future report on Waste customer satisfaction and street cleaning.

It was assumed that there would be no Revenue Support Grant for 2017/18 (as advised in the Autumn Statement 2015), following a number of years of reducing grant.

It was understood that Chiltern has the option of tax rises limited to the higher of 2% or £5 (band D).  It was noted that the new homes bonus grant was expected to be higher in 2017/18 due to the increased tax base.  It was assumed that staff salaries were likely to rise by 1%, contracts by 2% and energy by 4%.  The recharges between SBDC and CDC increase as more shared services come into force..  The Committees attention was drawn to some  budget increases including 92k adjustment to waste contract split with Wycombe and in respect of the Amersham Council Offices rental income.

The final settlement figure was expected to be announced later in December 2017 and the budget would then go to Cabinet for approval in February 2017.

Members asked what the percentage split was for staff costs and it was advised that they had been approved by the Joint Committee and that they vary from service to service.  It was also advised that the service costs were not just staff costs but often this was the main cost.  .

With regard to trading undertakings, the difference between the budget and previous year’s actuals  was due to a one off business rate refund.

On the Revenue Account Summary it was noted that the overall budget surplus was over £1m and how this would be earmarked would be part of the final budget decisions in February.

Finally, in the Fees & Charges Appendix 10, the cost to the public of purchasing wheeled bins and additional green waste services was discussed.  It was reported that new residents were required to buy these if a previous resident had lost or damaged the original one provided.  This presented a substantial cost to some residents on benefits, similarly it was asked whether the high cost of a second green waste bin could be justified.  It was requested that these costs be reviewed at the next Waste Committee meeting.

RESOLVED

The draft revenue service budget for 2017/18 was noted.