Loading
There is no summary of this meeting yet. Summaries are written once the council publishes the minutes, which are its official record of what a meeting decided. They usually appear a few weeks after the meeting.
The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.
There were no declarations of interest received.
The minutes of the meeting held on 2nd November 2023, were approved as a true and accurate record.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. The officer went through the report. The officer highlighted points in relation to the Joint Committee and the various sub-committees. Officers advised that the projected underspend for 2024-2025 is just over £295,000. The total underspend overall is 385,000. This provides a surplus of over £680,000 which can be used to offset the budget for future years, to reduce the levy. Officers advised that there had been little financial activity during quarter 2. Following scrutiny, the report was noted.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. The officer outlined the three funding options that are being considered by Joint Committee. Due to the financial challenges being faced by the constituent authorities, it is recommended that the continuity budget minus 10% be endorsed by the Joint Committee. Members expressed their concern at the amount of current reserves and suggested that it would be more beneficial for local authorities to utilise the current reserves to offset the budget given the current financial hardships that all authorities are facing. Officers acknowledge that the CJC is still currently in its infancy and by retaining a good level of reserves this will allow the CJC to progress its work next year. The officer advised members that it is prudent to have a minimum reserve of £200,000. Members questioned the value for money if the do minimum option is agreed. It is acknowledged that in order for the CJC to achieve its agreed objectives, a budget of £2m is required. However, this is the second budget that is proposed to be set at the ‘do minimum’ level. Members were concerned that with the financial position of the local authorities is unlikely to improve in the near future, and if the CJC keeps setting do minimum budgets, then very little will be achieved other than the statutory minimum. Members queried what the proposed funding looked like for future years. Members suggested that the CJC should have been given further reduction options, perhaps 15% for them to consider. Option 1 in the report outlined the optimal budget position and what could be achieved through this. Whilst members understand the financial difficulties facing local authorities at this current time, members were keen to understand the pathway that the CJC has in place to be able to progress the objectives of the CJC in future years, in order to move away from the do minimum approach. Members agreed that the Chair of the scrutiny should write a letter to the Chair of the CJC expressing the views of the scrutiny committee om relation to the draft budget, Following scrutiny, the report was noted.
The Forward Work Programme was noted.
There were no urgent items.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.