To receive any apologies for absence from Panel Members.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Sharpe, Councillor Gosling was attending the meeting as a substitute.

It was noted that the Executive Director of Resources was unwell but would join the meeting virtually.

To receive any declarations of interest from Panel Members.

Councillor Price declared a personal interest as she was a member of Maidenhead Golf Club.

To consider and approve the minutes of the meeting held on 6th November 2023.

Councillor Price was concerned that the Panel had not held an offline meeting to discuss the work programme. She was unsure that items suggested at the beginning of the year had been scoped and would be brought forward for the Panel to consider.

Councillor Howard said that he had initially scoped some topics but needed to clarify if they were appropriate for consideration by the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Panel.

Councillor Reeves felt that previous agendas had been full and the Panel had held some constructive discussions at meetings but it would be good to explore items for the New Year.

Councillor Wilson said that the work programme was filling up, he was not sure whether a separate offline meeting was needed.

Councillor Hunt added that she had brought Pickins Piece to the attention of the Chair and this had been considered in November, Panel Members should suggest items to the Chair if they were interested in it coming to a Panel meeting.

The Chair said that the work programme was on the agenda but would not be discussed at the meeting due to the time taken to scrutinise the budget. He understood the point made by Councillor Price and he could explore the best way for the Panel to discuss the work programme.

AGREED UNANIMOUSLY: That the minutes of the meeting held on 6^th November 2023 were approved as a true and accurate record.

This report sets out the council’s proposed draft revenue and capital budgets for 2024/25 and the Medium-Term Financial Plan (MTFP) through to 2028/29.

The draft budget will be scrutinised by the Place Overview and Scrutiny Panel and the People Overview and Scrutiny Panel in advance of 19^th December. The comments and notes from these meetings will be published as a supplement to this agenda.

The Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Panel are asked to consider the 2024/25 draft budget and the comments made by the two other Panels. The Panel is able to make relevant recommendations to Cabinet on the draft budget for consideration.

Cabinet will consider recommendations made by scrutiny and responses received as part of the budget consultation and will agree a final budget to put forward on 7^th February 2024. The final budget will go to Full Council for approval and adoption on 27^th February 2024.

The Chair introduced the report and suggested an approach to the meeting on how the Panel scrutinised the budget. The People Overview and Scrutiny Panel and Place Overview and Scrutiny Panel had considered their areas of the budget and these comments had been summarised for the Panel to read.

Stephen Evans, Chief Executive, said that the draft budget had been considered by Cabinet on 13^th December and this was now out for consultation until 22^nd January 2024. Responses to the consultation would be considered before Cabinet put forward a final budget for approval by Full Council. A huge amount of work had gone into the budget but there was still a significant risk and things like inflation and demand were outside of the council’s control. Budget management and delivery of the proposals now needed to happen particularly considering the weak financial resilience of the council. There was a current projected overspend of about £7 million and this would lead to a reduced level of reserves going into next year, which could leave RBWM with some of the lowest reserves of any unitary local authority.

Councillor Price wanted to understand how robust the Medium Term Financial Plan was. Assumptions had been made about the national situation, she asked where these assumptions had come from and been evidenced. Councillor Price suggested that impacts which were anticipated to affect the council were added into the budget monitoring reports. If things were more positive than predicted, she asked what the priority would be.

Stephen Evans said that the Medium Term Financial Plan was a rolling 5 year plan and was updated annually for each budget. If a material change was to occur, the finance team could consider how to include this on the monthly reports considered by Cabinet. National sources were used for assumptions and this was updated each year. Stephen Evans believed that the first priority should be to build up the reserves.

Councillor J Tisi noted the assumptions that had been made, particularly pay inflation which had been estimated at 3%. He asked how lenient some of the assumptions were.

Elizabeth Griffiths, Executive Director of Resources, explained that pay inflation was set on a pay deal which was why it was 3% for next year. The Medium Term Financial Plan was a draft and the team were working through some of the assumptions for future years. Forecasts could lose integrity if considered too far in advance. The assumptions made were reasonable at the current point in time and considering the local government settlement which had recently been confirmed, the assumptions made had been relatively accurate.

Councillor J Tisi said that there was some commentary in the report on the level of debt, which was currently around £200 million. He asked how much it would cost for this debt to be refinanced going forward.

Elizabeth Griffiths said that the team had considered the cash flow on a week by week basis and considered when borrowing would be needed and what the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.

This report was considered by Cabinet in November and they agreed to the early adoption of increases to a range of fees and charges (F&C’s) for the financial year 2024/25 as set out in Appendix A. It is proposed to increase fees and charges to the levels detailed in Appendix A from 1 January 2024, in order to assist with ameliorating the council’s overall financial position and to help close the budget gap for the 2023/24 financial year.

The proposed changes in parking fees and charges are set out in Appendix B, and Cabinet agreed for these to go out to public consultation in December, for implementation in February 2024, following consideration of consultation feedback. Overview and Scrutiny forms part of this consultation.

The Place Overview and Scrutiny Panel and People Overview and Scrutiny Panel will consider the changes to fees and charges in their areas and any comments from the Panels will be published as a supplement to the agenda.

Councillor Howard commented on the parking charges and asked why there were so many different levels of charge. He felt that some of the charges were not realistic, as it seemed a percentage charge had just been added each year.

Andrew Durrant said that there were different rates at different locations. In future, the rates could be rationalised. There had been a standardised increase in parking charges while maintaining a free residents discount. A sensible approach had been applied to maximise revenue but there was further work to do to rationalise this going forward.

Stephen Evans said that some fees were discretionary and some were non-discretionary. This meant that some were set by central government while others were set at a level where the council could only recover its costs.

Councillor Jones added that parking income was a driver in balancing the budget, particularly with the low council tax base. Charges had been increased each year without a full review, each of the borough’s towns were different and a standardised approach was difficult. Councillor Jones suggested that she would like to see a parking charges strategy come forward to serve the residents better.

Councillor Howard supported this suggestion, it was good to reconsider parking charges using a proper review rather than just increasing by a certain percentage each year.

Councillor Price said that in previous years the Panel had seen the percentage increase for each fee but this had not been included. She requested that this was added for future years. Councillor Price asked for reassurance that a drop in demand had been factored in when parking charges were increased. On charging for use of parks, a discretionary charge for local charities was very open and this could put off charities from running events at an early stage. Councillor Price had noted that for charges on fines and anti-social behaviour, the council was not charging the maximum amount.

The Chair added that enforcement was needed for fines, he asked for further information on the relationship between the level of the fine and the amount of resource for enforcement.

Andrew Durrant said that there was an application process which would be considered by the Parks team, this discretion would allow the team to charge a smaller fee for certain groups and events. The Safety Advisory Group would consider applications for larger events. The Communities team would work in partnership with any events and could look to support with the event fee through the Community Lottery, for example. On enforcement, price points had been considered and a new enforcement contract had recently been agreed. A higher charge could be tabled but this would not necessarily lead to a behaviour change.

Councillor Wilson considered charges for betting shops, he asked if this was a national charge level.

Andrew Durrant explained that many of these charges had not changed, they were reviewed on a regular basis but not annually. These were mostly around cost recovery rather than generating further income.

The Chair noted that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 77.

To consider upcoming agenda items for future meetings of the Panel.

This item was not considered.