Agenda item

To review and scrutinise the performance management information and, where appropriate, to require response or action from the Executive Committee. 

85.1           The report of the Head of Corporate Services, circulated at Pages No. 21-66, attached performance management information for quarter 3 of 2017/18.  The Overview and Scrutiny Committee was asked to review and scrutinise the performance information and, where appropriate, identify any issues to refer to the Executive Committee for clarification or further action to be taken.

85.2           Members were advised that this was the third quarterly monitoring report for 2017/18 and progress against delivering the objectives and actions for each of the Council Plan priorities were reported through the Performance Tracker, attached at Appendix 1 to the report.  Key actions for the quarter were highlighted at Paragraph 2.3 of the report and included the preparation and approval of the annual budget and Medium Term Financial Strategy; Council approval of a further £12M for commercial property investment; a new tenant occupying one third of the top floor with the refurbishment of the rest of the building well underway; adoption of the Joint Core Strategy; conclusion of the garden waste project with the annual renewal of over 15,000 customers; and over 500 responses to the consultation on Public Space Protection Orders with the Executive Committee making a recommendation to Council to introduce an Order.  As always, due to the complex nature of the actions being delivered, it was inevitable that some would not progress as smoothly or quickly as envisaged and details were set out at Paragraph 2.4 of the report.  A number of these had been flagged to Members previously and a combination of factors meant that more progress had not been made between quarters; some of the proposals may be delivered over the course of the Council Plan rather than over the year.  In terms of the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), Members were informed that the status of each indicator was set out at Paragraph 3.2 of the report. Of the 15 indicators with targets, 13 indicators were on target and two were unlikely to achieve their target.  Areas of interest included KPIs 13, 14 and 15 in relation to determination of planning applications which were showing improvement compared to the previous year; KPI 19 which showed a significant reduction in the number of reported enviro-crimes; KPI 28 in relation to the increased number of sick days per full time employee – it was noted that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had been invited to a presentation on absence management in February; and KPI 29 in respect of percentage of waste recycled or composted which continued to perform strongly at 56%.  A Member questioned whether the recommendations which had come out of the absence management presentation in February would be taken forward.  In response, the Head of Corporate Services confirmed that they would and advised that a further breakdown would be given to explain the content of the KPIs in relation to sickness absence. The Member went on to raise concern that Councillors were not made aware of staff changes at an early enough stage.  The Head of Corporate Services clarified that Members were notified of staff changes on a monthly basis via the Member Update Sheet.  The Chief Executive recognised that changes to personnel could be difficult but, rather than being a Human Resources issue, this was more about service managers ensuring that there was a proper handover with Members and he undertook to raise this with the Management Team.

85.3           Turning to the financial information, the Head of Finance and Asset Management advised that the financial budget summary for quarter 3 showed a £590,640 surplus against the profiled budget; this had increased from £315,331 in quarter 2.  The table at Page No. 26, Paragraph 4.1 of the report, showed the expenditure position for the Council split between the main expenditure types.  The overall budget in the control of Heads of Service showed a surplus of £179,753 at the end of December and the summary position was set out at Appendix 2 to the report.  Particular reference was made to the surplus against treasury management activity, which was due to access to cheap borrowing rates and the use of more lucrative funds for cash investment, and the income from investment properties following the acquisition of three new commercial properties.  Business rates had continued to perform well with income of £240,000 for the year.  In terms of overspends, planning income had been consistently below target; garden waste was also below budget but that was expected and was a one-off issue relating to the change to a single renewal date for all customers. Appendix 3 to the report gave an update on the capital budget which showed an underspend against the profiled budget due to not utilising all of the agreed funding on the purchase of commercial investment properties and slippage on certain projects e.g. refurbishment of the Council Offices, as well as consistent underspends against expectations on disabled facilities grants.  Appendix 4 to the report provided a summary of the current usage of available reserves with £403,733 being spent during quarter 3.  Whilst there remained a significant balance on the reserves, it was anticipated that this would be spent during quarter 4.

85.4           A Member noted that retained income from the business rates scheme was showing a surplus of £240,000 and he questioned when this would be available to spend.  He also queried whether there was a programme in place for 100% retention.  The Head of Finance and Asset Management confirmed that the surplus of £240,000 was the anticipated year end position.  In terms of 100% retention, Officers were working through the scheme detail to see how the pilot would work.  If it was in line with the projection, the scheme could generate an additional £400,000 for the Council.  The Chief Executive reminded Members that business rates, and other income streams such as the New Homes Bonus, were volatile and any changes made by the government could have a significant impact on the authority’s accounts.  One of the risks with business rates was the potential number of appeals and this was something which had been a substantial cost to the Council in the past. 

85.5           A Member drew attention to Page No. 27, Paragraph 4.12, which set out that the Council had successfully bid for £4.53M from the growth deal fund to improve the existing Longford roundabout and A40 access to the new development site at Innsworth.  In order to access the funds, a business case needed to be put forward to the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) for approval.  With this in mind, he questioned how the Council would finance the transport consultants who were being contracted to do that work. The Head of Finance and Asset Management explained that the Executive Committee had approved £100,000 from the surplus to support the development of the business case; if approved by the LEP board, this would be replenished so there would be no detriment to the Council financially, although there was clearly an element of risk.  The Head of Development Services confirmed that the first stage of the process was to produce the business case and this would unlock the wider allocation.  Whilst there was no guarantee, the money had been allocated to this project and the risk had not increased since Members had been advised previously.  A Member went on to question whether progress had been made in respect of the MAFF site and was informed that an Officer group was working up an options appraisal for a potential care home or residential facility on the site.

85.6           In response to a query regarding planning income, the Head of Development Services explained that a number of applications which had been expected throughout the year had not yet been received for various external reasons.  This could not have been foreseen and they were still anticipated to come forward at some stage given that a lot were reserved matters applications linked to outline planning permissions.  She pointed out that there had been a 20% increase in planning fees nationally which would have an impact but consideration was being given as to how to increase opportunities for commercialising the planning service.   A Member raised concern that conflicting advice was being given at the pre-application stage and when the formal application was submitted.  The Head of Development Services explained that pre-application advice assisted with the planning process and was a crucial way to increase planning income.  Whilst schemes did occasionally change throughout the life of an application, there should be consistency in the advice being given.  If Members heard of any times when this did not happen as it should then it was very important that she was given the details.

85.7           In response to a query regarding the Leisure Centre, the Head of Finance and Asset Management advised that the Council received £150,000 per year from Places for People plus a 45% share of the profit share in year 4 – 45% went to Places for People and the remaining 10% went to the Board to be used for improvements to the Leisure Centre and its facilities.

85.8           Having considered the information provided, it was

RESOLVED          That the performance management information for quarter 3 of 2017/18 be NOTED.