STORRINGTON & SULLINGTON PARISH COUNCIL

Minutes of the Meeting of the Finance and Budget Committee held in the Chanctonbury Room, The Parish Hall, Thakeham Road, Storrington, on Wednesday, 14th January, 2009, commencing at 2.00 p.m.

Present: Mr. R. Dawe in the Chair, Mr. C. Mason, Mr. A. Mullard, Mr. D. Roper, Mrs. L. Wheatley and Mrs. A. Worthington-Leese.

1.    Apologies for Absence were received from Mr. A. Mullard (dental appointment).  The reason for absence was duly ACCEPTED.

2.    To Receive Declarations of Interest from Members.  There were no declarations of interest from Members.

3.    To Approve and Sign the Minutes of the last Meeting held on the 21st November, 2007.   These minutes were duly AGREED to be a correct record of the proceedings thereat and were signed by the Chairman.

4.    Matters Arising :-

(a)    Minute Nos. 6, 22(a) : Storrington Parish Church Headstones.  This topic was discussed and the meeting felt that this was a matter for the church to pursue.

(b)    Minute No. 22(b) : Budget Heading Hedges/Fences.  It was duly noted that this should now be just ‘Fences’.    

5.    To Consider the Draft Budget for the financial year 1st April, 2009 to 31st March, 2010.  The suggested budget was presented.  The following was agreed :-
 
    Income

(a)    Due to the current financial position, it was considered that Budget head: Treasury Interest should be reduced to £1,000.

(b)    It was pointed out that the £27,097.00 was the amount of S.106 money towards the Hall changes.

(c)    Cricket and Football Club Rents.  Mrs. Wheatley declared a personal interest in this element and took no part in the discussion.  It was AGREED to recommend to full Council :-
That provided this was allowable under the terms of their respective leases that these should be increased to take into consideration inflation over the past five years.
                                              
Expenditure 

(a)    Salaries – this should be increased to £72,000 to allow for the Caretaker to undertake litter picking on Parish Council owned land.

(b)    Training – this should be increased to £1,000.

(c)    Telephone costs should be re-examined and supplier comparisons should be obtained.

(d)    Councillors Allowances should be reduced to £0.

(e)    Misc petty cash expenses – postage should be kept to a minimum and e-mail used more.  In future councillors should be sent an e-mail to advise them that their minutes and agendas were available in their pigeon holes for collection.

(f)    Notice board rates – an appeal should be made against the cost of this and point out that a fair number of the notices were in fact put up on their behalf.

(g)    Grant aid – each time a request for a donation is received the Council needs to be made aware of which budget head this would be coming from and the amount remaining in that budget.

(h)    Electricity – supplier comparisons should be obtained.

(i)    Advertising – when enquiries for bookings are received they should be asked where they obtained the Hall details from.

(j)    Rates – The Clerk to provide a report on the implications of the Hall becoming a Registered Charity including any possible reduction in rates payable.

(k)    Heating and Air Conditioning maintenance – supplier comparisons should be obtained.

(l)    Gas – supplier comparisons should be obtained.

(m)    Dog Bins – H.D.C., should be informed that as they supplied all the dog bins within this Parish, that they should empty them without this Council having to pay for this service.

(n)    Pond maintenance – should be increased to £3,500.

The Committee AGREED :-

    To recommend to full Council that the Precept should be increased by £2.95%, making a Precept of £167,293.75.
   
    The Clerk, Assistant Clerk and Mrs. Wheatley should have a meeting about the possibility of obtaining grants towards the various projects.

6.    To Consider the Bank Reconciliations for November and December, 2008.  These were duly NOTED.

7.    To Consider Purchase of Land Between Oak Close and Thakeham Road.  A tree report about this land only arrived late today and therefore had not been examined.  Mrs. Worthington-Leese should go through the report to assess whether there would be any major problems should the Council decide to purchase this land.  Mr. Mason did not feel that the Council should purchase this land in the current economic climate.  However, Mrs. Worthingon-Leese felt the Council should purchase it in order to preserve the look of the road.  The general consensus was that the Council should purchase this land, but to offer to pay for same over a five-year period.  This topic should be placed on the agenda for the next meeting of the Council. 

8.    To Consider the Completion of Annual Audit Report from Mazars.  This was duly NOTED. 

9.    To Review the following and make recommendations to full Council :-
(a)    Standing Orders.  It was AGREED that the wording of Standing Order No. 41 should be changed as follows :-
        
    The Chairman of the Council may, at his request, be an ex-officio voting members of every Committee.

    (b)    Financial Regulations.  It was not felt that any alterations were required.
   
(c)    Risk Assessments.  It was not felt that any alterations were required.

(d)    Insurance, including amount of Fidelity Guarantee cover.  It was not felt that any alternations were required.

10.    Review Debtors.  The Chanctonbury Leisure Centre had not paid an invoice for £25 from June, 2008 – a letter chasing payment had been sent.  Mrs. King had a party in August, 2008 and had still not paid the £125 but had promised to settle within the next two weeks.  A letter should be written to her stating that if not paid within the promised period, the Council would take Small Claims Court proceedings against her.  The Drama Group had not paid their October invoice for £622, but this was due to the fact that they had a new Treasurer who had not been given the invoice, so this should now be received shortly.

11.    H.D.C. Asset Management Plan.  It was AGREED the following comments should be made :-

(a)    There was no mention of the Mill Pond and the works on this were supposed to have been done by now, but had not.
(b)    The document failed to achieve objective (4), page 4 “Ensure that the AMP is kept up to date but succinct.
(c)    The last five lines of para. 4.1, page 22 sum up what it’s all about.
(d)    The asset lists on pages 45 to 47 are based on 03/2008, but the paper refers to a 5-year rolling programme.  Does this mean that some valuations are and will be 5 years old?
(e)    On the same topic, what is the basis of these asset valuations?  Regardless of the professional bodies involved, are they on the basis of local government accounting practices or on market purchase/disposal values (where realisable)?
(f)    What is the total cost of this asset management system against the current value of the assets being managed, i.e., is this being over managed?
(g)    How will the needs of the South be properly and fairly considered in the decisions Horsham makes?

12.    Any Urgent Business for Discussion/Decision.
(a)    Environmental Cleansing.  Mrs. Worthington-Leese reported that this was the statutory duty of Horsham  District  Council  and  was  originally  paid  for  100%  by them, but the Parish was now only funded 60%.  This Council therefore gave notice with effect from the 31st December, 2008.  The second meeting of the working group looking at this topic met yesterday and H.D.C., had now decided to offer all parishes 75% of their costs.  However, this Council resolved not to do it unless it was refunded 100%.  Other parishes realized that this parish would get something they did not and asked that this Council should reconsider the current offer.  If this Council wished to do this, there would be a need to suspend Standing Orders in order to discuss this again in February because it had been less than six months since the decision was taken. 

    Mr. Dawe asked whether there was a downside to the decision to hand cleansing entirely back to H.D.C.  H.D.C., had indicated that this Parish would not be cleaned to the same standard as had been by the Parish.  It was AGREED that this Council’s response to H.D.C., should be :-

    This matter had been put to this Committee whose view was the decision this Council had already made should stand and they were not prepared to recommend suspension of Standing  Orders to allow further discussion as it was felt that they wanted to stick to the status quo.  Furthermore the Council is expects that H.D.C., will be picking it to the standard that they demanded of the Parish when the Parish was funded 60% and which had been agreed directly with H.D.C., officers as the minimum needed to keep the parish streets clean and litter free.  This letter should be signed by Mrs. Worthington-Leese.

(b)    Freedom of Information Request.  An allotment holder who had been given notice to quit because he did not live within this Parish and had not paid his rent had submitted a Freedom of Information request.  This information was being gathered together.   The letter should be acknowledged and advised that we were in the process of collating the information, however, he should be advised of the cost of providing the photocopies plus postage costs and asked to confirm that he still requires the information.  He should be asked to send a cheque and upon receipt the information would be sent to him.
   
13.    Chairman’s Announcements.  There were no announcements.

    There being no further business the meeting closed at 4.20 p.m.