Agenda item

Report ES12019

The Committee was invited to consider the Portfolio Holder’s Draft 2012/13 Budget incorporating future cost pressures and initial draft budget saving options which were reported to Executive on 11th January 2012.

Members were requested to consider the initial draft budget saving proposals and to also identify any further action that might be taken to reduce cost pressures facing the Council over the next four years.

The Executive had requested that each PDS Committee consider the initial draft budget savings and cost pressures for their Portfolio with views reported back to the Executive. Outstanding issues and areas of uncertainty remained and any further updates would be included in the 2012/13 Council Tax report to the Executive’s next meeting.

A number of comments were made by Members on various issues related to further savings proposals at Appendix 2C to Report ES 12019.

Parking Charges (proposal 2)

In advocating parking charges based on demand, a Member asked whether data was held on the demand for pay and display parking bays according to specific hours of the day. He further enquired if any modelling had been undertaken on raising prices for peak hours and lowering prices at the end of the day. Related to such matters of managing demand and supply, the Assistant Director referred to a report on parking charges scheduled for the Committee’s next meeting.

It was confirmed to Members that reasonably good data was held on what people paid. However the way forward focused on simplifying charges rather than having more tariffs for different types of the day which could introduce complexities and be confusing. Varying tariffs could also cause people to change shopping habits. A report on a proposed model of parking charges was scheduled for the Committee’s next meeting (subject to Executive/Full Council requiring an increased income budget from parking charges). Concerning the term “harmonisation” this did not reflect the current model of proposed parking charges which it was intended would take account of the needs of specific locations.

Another Member highlighted that there were also cost implications associated with variable parking charges, such as the costs for equipment provision which might weigh against having higher charges in certain areas.

The Chairman referred to the work of the Committee’s Parking Working Group which reported in May 2009 and which tended to support the comments of officers above. He commented that different charges could lead to confusion and increased appeals. In practice the Executive would set the Budget headline for parking income and the precise achievement of the budget would be for the Committee to consider.

Highway maintenance (proposals 4 and 6)

Concerning highways maintenance and pot hole repair, a Member suggested that many residents felt that their roads were missing out. As a way to help address this he suggested that there could be more value for money on Planned Maintenance by undertaking works along 40 metre sections of highway rather than renewing whole roads. 

Floral bedding in highway amenity areas (proposal 9)

Before making savings, further work was advocated to try and obtain more sponsors for amenities such as flower beds in highway amenity areas.

Concerning any saving related to the removal of winter floral bedding and bulbs in parks and highway amenity areas, it was suggested having more bulbs which are then retained and not disposed of.

Friends Groups (proposal 14)

Members spoke against proposed savings on support to Friends Groups.

A Member suggested that any reduction in support for Friends Groups could have a detrimental financial effect. Friends Groups were able to draw funding into the borough and it was suggested that this could amount to more than the savings proposed. Such views were also supported by another Member, who also referred to the work of the Big Society Working Group commissioned by the Executive and Resources PDS Committee.

A Member felt that support should continue to be provided to Friends Groups to help maintain toilets in public parks and he suggested that there would be more customer complaints if the saving went ahead.

The Portfolio Holder expressed his opposition to any cut backs in support for Friends Groups and explained that he was pushing hard to see this removed from the list of proposed further savings.

Fortnightly paper collections (proposal 17)

A Member expressed her opposition to fortnightly paper collections. Paper bins could be weighty after the first week and if more income could be obtained from the waste paper collected this should be looked at. Another Member highlighted that there were opportunities for residents to take their paper waste to the Council’s recycling sites; and the saving of £300k was not an insignificant sum. 

The Portfolio Holder advised that, in his view, a fortnightly paper collection should not be considered at the present time. The Government had made funding available for a weekly waste collection and it may be necessary to re-visit the issue after the Council’s bid to the Department of Communities and Local Government is known.

A Member also suggested that there might be a possible invest to save opportunity through having more local recycling banks thereby providing residents with closer recycling points. Such an approach might help with any change. 

In arriving at key points to put to the Executive the Chairman summarised the view of the PDS as:

• the Committee had concerns regarding rises in car park charges and the potential impact on the local economy;

• the importance of the street scene is to be highlighted;

• significant street scene savings have already been made for the new contract starting April 2012 and the impact of the savings needed to be reviewed;

• for carriageways and footways there is a reluctance to support budget reductions which could lead to an increased degradation of highway assets;

• further work is necessary on the proposals which affected Friends Groups and paper collection;

• On grounds maintenance, residents could be asked to undertake more voluntary input with consideration given to such initiatives as watering of plants and flowers, and that developments are made towards self sufficiency in bedding plants. This option should be trialled for effectiveness before considering the budget saving in the report;

• Increased income generation from advertising should be considered in the next council year.

RESOLVED that the Committee’s comments be conveyed to the Executive meeting on 1^st February 2012.