Issue - meetings

Further to Minute No. 105 of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 17th December, 2014 consideration was given to a report presented by Pete Hudson, Chief Finance Officer, which provided details of the current forecast outturn for the 2014/15 programme and enabled the Council to review the capital programme for the financial years 2015/16 and 2016/17.

The budget process that led to the original Capital Programme for 2014/15 to 2016/17 ensured that the Council’s capital investment plans were aligned with its strategic priorities and vision for Rotherham.

In order to maintain that strategic link, and make best use of the capital resources available to the Council, it was important that this programme was kept under regular review and where necessary revisions made. This programme was last reviewed in September, 2014, and had now been the subject of a further review, the results of which were reflected in the Directorate summary table presented as part of the report.  A detailed analysis of the programme for each Directorate was attached as part of the report.

The financial implications of the Programme were reflected in the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) and Treasury Management and Investment Strategy.

This updated programme had been prepared in light of the capital resources known to be available to the Council over these financial years and estimated on a prudent basis.

The Council was continuing to undertake a comprehensive review of its assets and buildings portfolio, with the aim to rationalise both its operational and non-operational asset holdings, which may contribute both a future capital receipt and a revenue saving.

The Chairman suggested that consideration be given to an all Member Seminar on the Corporate Plan Priorities and the Capital Programme and how the two married together.

Councillor Ellis referred to the Capital Strategy and the associated spend and asked that the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board give some consideration to review the extent of the delegation of powers to officers.

The Deputy Leader confirmed that consideration was being given to capital and the budget setting process with officers and in particular the Capital Strategy.  Approvals were being put in place for capital projects and options available and this could be undertaken in conjunction with the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board.

Councillor Whelbourn referred to the Forward Plan of Key Decisions and how it did not appear to be working as effective as it should be.  Discussion had taken place at other meetings as to how it was being under-utilised and this was confirmed by the Deputy Leader who reiterated the powers of the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board as part of the Access to Information Rules.

Councillor Ellis requested additional information for the report moving forward to identify which projects were on time and on budget.  Officers confirmed this could be incorporated into future reports.

Councillor Ellis also sought further information on the detail of the new integrated housing management I.T. system and the programme for implementation of Phases  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42

-           Director of Finance to report.

Councillor Hoddinott, Deputy Leader, introduced a report by the Strategic Director of Resources and Transformation which provided details of the current forecast outturn for the 2014/15 programme and enabled the Council to review the capital programme for the financial years 2015/16 and 2016/17.

The budget process that led to the original Capital Programme for 2014/15 to 2016/17 ensured that the Council’s capital investment plans were aligned with its strategic priorities and vision for Rotherham.

In order to maintain that strategic link, and make best use of the capital resources available to the Council, it was important that this programme was kept under regular review and where necessary revisions made. This programme was last reviewed in September, 2014, and had now been the subject of a further review, the results of which were reflected in the Directorate summary table presented as part of the report.  A detailed analysis of the programme for each Directorate was attached as part of the report.

The financial implications of the Programme were reflected in the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) and Treasury Management and Investment Strategy.

This updated programme had been prepared in light of the capital resources known to be available to the Council over these financial years and estimated on a prudent basis.

The Council was continuing to undertake a comprehensive review of its assets and buildings portfolio, with the aim to rationalise both its operational and non-operational asset holdings, which may contribute both a future capital receipt and a revenue saving.

(1)          Resolved:- That the contents of this report be noted.

(2)  Recommended:-  That the updated 2014/15 to 2016/17 Capital Programme be approved, in particular noting the following major additions to the Capital Programme and supplementary approvals to existing schemes:-

·                New Central Primary School, Eldon Road.  (Additional cost of £1.050m, Minute F5 Cabinet Member for Children and Education Services, 16th September 2014).

·                Rawmarsh St. Mary’s PRU (Cost of £0.069m.  Works approved by the former Strategic Director of Children and Young People’s Services, Joyce Thacker, 23rd July 2014).

·                Thrybergh Country Park Phased Improvements (Cost of £0.136m.  Works approved by the Director of Internal Audit and Asset Management, Colin Earl, 5th November 2014 and reported to CSART, 27th November 2014).

·                Aston, Aughton and Swallownest Phase 2 Drainage Works (Cost of £0.145m.  Grant funding allocated by the Environment Agency.).

·                Bailey House Renovation project (Additional cost of £0.034m approved by CSART, 23rd October 2014.  Original project approval, Minute C34 Cabinet, 21st July 2010).

Where not funded by grant or by the service, the revenue implications from these schemes has been built into the Council’s MTFS assumptions.