To consider the fees and charges for the Budget 2022/23.

Andrew Vallance, Head of Finance, explained that the fees and charges were raised where they could be by inflation, this would look to offset contract fees where they had also been raised. Some fees were statutory and were therefore controlled by the government, some were ring fenced and could not make a profit and in other areas the council had benchmarked against other local authorities. Considering some of the major fees and charges, Andrew Vallance said that:

·         Parking had increased by inflation.

·         Roads and street works had to be considered on a case by case basis but was nearly at inflation.

·         Green waste had been increased by 4.8%, in previous years RBWM had increased this above inflation.

·         The figure on Building Control should be 3%, this had been missed out on the original report which had been included in the agenda pack. Building Control had recently come in house so RBWM was able to set the fee.

·         Marriages and civil partnership ceremonies had gone up by 3.5% due to statutory obligations.

·         Cemeteries and church yards had gone up by inflation.

·         Local Land Charges was an example of where officers had benchmarked against another local authority.

·         Temporary Traffic Regulation Orders and Highway Licenses were at inflation.

The Chairman asked what the rationale was for the increase in car parking prices which RBWM was looking to implement and why they varied across the borough.

Alysse Strachan, Head of Neighbourhood Services, said that the parking fees and charges were set out with the same principle as all the other fees and charges. A number of factors needed to be considered, for example usage, parking patterns, considering previous increases, considering fees in similar car parks both in and out of the borough and the cost of administering any changes. The cost of the residents discount parking scheme also needed to be considered. The 4.8% increase was the overall budget position rather than individual tariffs. Most of the difference had been due to rounded up car parking charges, with the biggest increase being 50% which was for commercial permits.

Councillor Sharpe said that there was a reasonable level of inflation. He asked if changes had been made due to other local authorities and how much they were charging.

Alysse Strachan said that other local authorities parking charges were considered by the team. RBWM offered a residents parking discount to encourage residents to park in the borough.

Adele Taylor, Executive Director of Resources, said that fees and charges were determined on a service by service basis. For things like Building Control, RBWM needed to consider other competition in the market. The 4.8% was not necessarily on the fee itself but on the budgeted amount.

Councillor L Jones said that there was a large range of car parking charges across the borough, particularly in Windsor. The residents parking discount scheme did not apply in shopping areas and was a particular issue for those with mobility issues who needed to park close by. Victoria Street was a good option and was close to the shops in Windsor, Councillor L Jones understood that Windsor was a tourist town but she wanted this to be reconsidered by officers, either by incorporating this car park into the residents discount scheme or bringing down the parking charge. She asked how much extra income RBWM would look to receive from the increase in parking charges. Councillor L Jones continued by explaining that she was pleased to see that parking permits were not increasing however she expressed concern with the visitor vouchers, where a one hour restriction meant that two hours permit needed to be paid for.

Councillor Werner and Councillor Muir joined the meeting.

Alysse Strachan said that the Victoria Street option was included in the report that had been considered by Cabinet, but this was not agreed due to the cost that the council would incur. Alma Road and Alexandra car park were the options which had been agreed would be where the residents parking discount would apply. Regarding the visitor vouchers, the two hour charge was £1 and therefore the charge was minimal but this could be explored in future years.

Councillor L Jones said that it cost £2.40 for one hour at Victoria Street and £3.90 for two hours, these prices were unfair on those that needed to use the car park. She asked if there was any way that this charge could not be increased, it was something that Councillor L Jones felt should be revisited. She requested that this comment was recorded in the minutes as a minority comment.

Alysse Strachan confirmed that the offer would be reviewed and that officers could consider Victoria Street car park as part of this review.

Adele Taylor added that it would be part of the review on the residents discount scheme, officers had to consider the impact on the budget if Victoria Street had been included. Any recommendation would need to consider what the alternative method of funding would be.

Councillor L Jones asked if the figure in terms of income that would be lost could be provided, if the parking charges were kept the same and were not increased.

Alysse Strachan explained that to include Victoria Street in the residents discount scheme would cost the council £100,000. For the figure on how much it would cost the council if car parking charges were not increased, Alysse Strachan said that she would take this away from the meeting and report back.

ACTION – Alysse Strachan to find out information on how much it would cost RBWM if car parking charges were not increased at Victoria Street car park.

Councillor Werner said there was a similar issue in Maidenhead, two open air car parks were part of the residents discount scheme but these were scheduled to be closed and built on in the immediate future. He asked if officers had done analysis on the level that parking could be increased by before a decrease in usage would see the council lose money.

Alysse Strachan said that officers monitored usage and trend data constantly to see any impact an increase in fees had. Once the residents discount scheme had been implemented, this could be reviewed. West Street car park was in high demand and would be part of the discount scheme.

Councillor Werner asked if officers felt the Nicholsons Shopping Centre car park was too expensive to include in the residents discount scheme.

Alysse Strachan said that various data and models had been used. It was a balance of cost and use, she was happy to share the models and data with Councillor Werner outside the meeting.

ACTION – Alysse Strachan to provide the Panel with the data and models used to decide which car parks in Maidenhead would be part of the residents discount scheme.

Adele Taylor added that the decision on the residents discount scheme had already been made by Cabinet and the call in period had expired. However, the feedback would be useful to consider as part of the review.

Councillor Werner commented on the Platinum Jubilee celebrations for the Queen, which would be taking place in June 2022. He asked what permissions residents would need from the council to hold things like street parties.

Adele Taylor said that information on this would be coming out in due course, a dedicated website would also be created which residents could easily access. A message would also go out in the Borough Bulletin.

Councillor L Jones considered the income targets that had been set for parking. There had been a significant impact on the modelling from Covid but this had predicted an uplift after the pandemic. However, this was not to the level of previous parking targets, she asked what rationale had been applied to ensure that parking targets were achievable.

Neil Walter, Parking and Enforcement Manager, said that officers had modelled the effect of the pandemic on parking and this had been very accurate. RBWM was back to about 80% of its expected parking income and there was an ambition for this to eventually rise back to 100%. A number of car parks across the borough were above pre pandemic levels in both usage and income targets. However, season tickets were a concern. Workers were not returning to the office and therefore parking season tickets had not been renewed. An example was one business which usually had over 250 parking season tickets, they did not currently have any and this was a significant lose to parking income.

Councillor L Jones asked if the 80% for parking income was the average across the borough. On season tickets, she asked if this was a risk in achieving the proposed parking income targets.

Neil Walter confirmed that it was 80% average across the whole borough. Season tickets were already a concern for officers and this had been budgeted for.

Adele Taylor said that the season ticket risk had been factored into the budget, any income budget was a risk as it was demand led. She explained that it would be considered as part of her report, income was harder to predict. Adele Taylor was confident that best estimates had been made but this would be monitored closely.

Councillor Cannon, Cabinet Member for Public Protection and Parking, responded to a question by Councillor Werner earlier in the meeting about street parties. He said that any fees for the road closures would be waived by the council.

Adele Taylor said that she would confirm the details after the meeting and report back to the Panel.

ACTION – Adele Taylor to provide information on street closures for street parties for the Queens Platinum Jubilee.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Corporate Overview & Scrutiny Panel was asked to comment, and make recommendations to Cabinet, on:

i)             The proposed fees and charges for 2022/23 as set out in Appendix A.