Issue - meetings

a) Considered and noted the projected £505k overspend on the 2025/26 revenue budget.

b) Agreed the inclusion of an additional £400k UK Shared prosperity Fund (UKSPF) grant for capital projects, and its addition to the capital programme.

c) Considered and noted the forecast £2.505 million underspend on the 2025/26 capital programme and the currently anticipated £1.14 million carry?forward, which remains subject to change at year?end.

The Executive Member for Financial Sustainability presented the Financial Management 2025/26 Quarter 3 Forecast to year end.  The report noted that a revenue overspend of £505,000 was forecast, showing a slight improvement on quarter 2. Improved forecasts were noted in centrally managed costs for legal and governance services and leisure services, while planning and building control showed a deteriorating position due to increased salary and agency pressures.

Members were advised that interest and investment income had improved, and a contribution to the interest equalisation reserve was proposed in line with policy. The capital budget for 2025/26 had been revised to £11.885 million, including £400,000 from the UK Shared Prosperity Fund, with a forecast underspend of £2.5 million, of which £1.114 million was expected to be carried forward.

Members also received an update on the Council’s debt position. Whilst overall debt had risen to £2.35 million, £819,000 of this related to scheduled payments from neighbouring authorities. Excluding these, underlying debt had reduced by £435,000, totalling £1.532 million.

The Executive Member for Financial Wellbeing proposed the recommendations as detailed in the report. The Executive Member for Corporate Services seconded the proposal.

Members sought clarification on the timetable for spending the UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) capital allocation. It was confirmed that Government had extended the deadline to October 2026, allowing projects to continue beyond the previously expected March cut?off.

Questions were raised about the wider economic outlook, including interest rates, inflation and the possibility of recession and how these might affect future Council budgets. It was noted that it remained too early to assess the full impact. The Government’s existing three?year settlement, issued in December 2025 and confirmed in January 2026, was still in place and any changes were unlikely to be known before November or December 2026.

In response to a question regarding whether recently added reserves could provide protection if financial pressures increased, it was confirmed that the additional reserves would offer some cushioning if required, although the intention remained not to rely on them unless necessary.

Members asked about the effect of future borrowing rates when refinancing loans. It was noted that interest rate movements could have an impact, however it was too early to determine the extent.

The motion to support the recommendation, having been proposed and seconded, was put to the meeting and upon a vote being taken, was declared CARRIED.

RESOVLED – Executive (A)considered and noted the projected £505k overspend on the 2025/26 revenue budget.

(B)agreed the inclusion of an additional £400k UK Shared prosperity Fund (UKSPF) grant for capital projects, and its addition to the capital programme.

(C)) considered and noted the forecast £2.505 million underspend on the 2025/26 capital programme and the currently anticipated £1.14 million carry?forward, which remains subject to change at year?end.

The Finance Business Partner introduced the report setting out the forecast outturn position for 2025/26 as at Quarter 3 and highlighted several key points.

Members were told that there was a forecast overspend of £504k against the net revenue budget, representing a slight £4k improvement from the Quarter 2 position. Appendix A provided the detailed breakdown and movements. A forecast overspend of £906k was also reported against the net cost of services budgets, with significant directorate variances shown in Appendix B.

Members heard that several areas had shown increased forecast overspends since Quarter 2, most notably ongoing shortfalls in income at BEAM and pressures within Planning due to salary and agency costs. However, improvements had been recorded in most other areas, including treasury management performance, leisure services following the new agency agreement, and a contingency release to mitigate BEAM pressures.

The Finance Business Partner reported aforecast overachievement of £357kin interest and investment income within corporate budgets, which officers proposed transferring to the interest equalisation reserve.

Members were informed that the 2025/26 capital programme had been revisedto include £400k of capital expenditure funded through the UK Shared Prosperity Fund, as reflected in Appendix C. A£2.5m forecast underspend against the capital programme was reported, £1.114m of which was proposed to be carried forward into 2026/27 for due works.

Finally, Members heard that overall debtors had increased by just over £380k since Quarter 2. Payments of £819k relating to the 30?day category, owed by neighbouring authorities, had now been received. The most significant outstanding debt sat in the over?180?day category, with discussions underway with services to address this and large debts already referred to the legal team.

The Chair thanked the Finance Business Partner for the report.

Members sought clarity on the position of Rapier House. They were advised that the site was currently being used as a base by the contractor, Glendales, until Amwell Depot became operational. It was explained that this arrangement was incurring a cost to the Council, which had been built into the 2026/27 budget, but was not expected to continue once the relocation had taken place.

Members heard that options for the future use of Rapier House were being explored, with a report scheduled to be brought before Members in the new financial year.

Members asked questions relating to the Transformation Team, Pinehurst Community Centre and staffing costs within the Planning Department.

Members were advised that Pinehurst Community Centre was no longer a Council asset, and therefore expenditure had not been considered, Members could explore its refurbishment should they so wish.

Members heard that, due to Local Government Reorganisation (LGR), the Transformation Team had become smaller, with its focus shifting towards digitalisation. This would be led by a newly appointed digital officer.

It was explained that the staffing pressures within the Planning Department -particularly the reliance on agency staff -currently outweighed the income generated by the service. Recruitment and retention of Planning Officers continued to be a nationwide challenge for local  ...  view the full minutes text for item 344