URL: https://stroud.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=318

Decision Maker: Strategy and Resources Committee

Outcome:

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose: To present to the Committee a forecast of the outturn position against the General Fund revenue budget, Housing Revenue Account and capital programme for 2025/26, in order to give an expectation of possible variances against budget.

Content: The Strategic Head of Finance (Section 151 Officer) introduced the report and outlined the following key points: The report detailed the financial position for 2025/26, there was an overspend on the General Fund of £30k. Pages 114 to 115 of the report pack detailed the main variances which included income assumptions for Development Control which had been reduced by £350k. There was a one off grant for Land Charges, additional income due to an underspend on the Ubico contract and an increase in garden waste income. There was also additional income for recyclates. A one off maintenance cost on the Capital Budget was listed in the report which related to associated works at Kingshill House and was included in the overall position. An ongoing pressure on Member expenses due to the inflationary uplift. An upcoming review on Member expenses would be included in the budget for the next financial year. A loss of income within Facility Management due to empty rental space at Ebley Mill. A one off cost within the Finance Team for use of agency staff for the current financial year. The overall position of the Housing Revenue Account showed an expected underspend of £145k which related to rental income, this was a small percentage compared to the overall rental income the Council received.   The following answers were provided to Members questions: Kingshill House was shown twice within the report as the Council could use the Revenue Budget to fund capital works however the work was only being funded once as it was not assumed within the base budget position. There was an annual budget for Kingshill House but this was located under the Revenue account. The work required this year needed additional funds over the amount allocated under the annual budget. The Strategic Head of Finance (Section 151 Officer) would provide a breakdown to Members on the alteration costs associated with the refurbishment of Ebley Mill reception area. It was unknown as to how long SDC would need the building once LGR was complete. The majority of the works for the refurbishment of Ebley Mill had been agreed prior to LGR however the previous reception was not fit for modern purpose. Once LGR was known to be taking place, the project was reviewed and continuation was agreed. The building would be a valuable asset and the Council had a duty to maintain it in a good state of repair. The Strategic Head of Finance (Section 151 Officer) would provide a breakdown to Committee regarding the communications overspend of £23k. The difference between Capital and Revenue Budget was based on the type of work required to be funded. The Kingshill House Capital Budget last year had been exhausted, and the budget listed in the report was an additional overspend on the Capital Budget. The ongoing revenue position for Kingshill House allowed for budget to be used for capital work and provided flexibility. The salary savings detailed under section 5 were largely unplanned vacancies and services had not been asked to not recruit to vacant posts. Any agency costs were displayed as the net cost rather than gross. Splitting salary savings into planned and unplanned savings was more complicated and was based on variables which included what the new structure of the future Council would look like with LGR. There were a number of workstreams as part of the implementation of LGR which were looking at existing staffing structures and costs. Officers were working hard to manage salary costs and drive efficiency.  The Strategic Head of Finance (Section 151 Officer) suggested a commitment for future reports that changes in budgets which were related to decisions specific to LGR would be listed separately. The Medium-Term Financial Plan (MTFP) had an assumption that there would be a change in the Councils pension contribution at the triennial review from April 2026.   Proposed by the Chair, Councillor Turner and seconded by Councillor Luff.   Councillor Luff advised that the Council was broadly on track under uncertain times due to the strength of the Council managing budgets over a longer period of time.   Councillor Braun commented that it was important that the Council maintained a functional reception area and was pleased to see the investment. Councillor Braun and the Chair, Councillor Turner, thanked the Officer for the report.   On being to the vote, the Motion was carried unanimously.   RESOLVED a)    To note the outturn forecast for the General Fund Revenue budget. b)    To note the outturn forecast for the Housing Revenue Account. c)    To note the outturn forecast for the Capital Programme.  

Date of Decision: October 2, 2025