York Council debts creeping up

The latest figures published this week show that the total Council debt stands at £319 million.

Borrowing May 2016

It is forecast to peak at £350 million in 2017 with new commitments like the Community Stadium, the York Central development and Guildhall office project all set to add to the overall debt.

Other projects like the so called community hub being constructed at Burnholme and the rest of the elderly person’s accommodation building programme could also add to the debt burden.

The figures mean that, in 2017, every Council taxpayer will pay £36 in interest charges on the borrowing.

The Council has been criticised for failing to get expenditure – and borrowing – under control with a string of recent decisions adding to the burden being placed on taxpayers.

£100,000 travel contract let by York Council in behind closed doors decision

Air travel included.

The York Council has appointed a new travel agent. They have gained a contract expected to be worth around £100,000 a year. They will deal with the Councils rail, hotel and “air” travel requirements.

Last year the Council spent £124,194 on this type of travel.

The decision was taken earlier in the week by a Council official at a behind closed doors meeting. No prior notice of the meeting was provided and the decision is not subject to “call in”.

Curiously the decision notice is listed as being taken on “4^th May 2016” which isn’t until next Wednesday.

Travel procurement

Guildhall future

A July deadline has been set for the publication of detailed design, project costs and lease / financing proposals for the Guildhall.

The complex has been largely unused for over 2 years now.

York Guildhall

The current plans involve refurbishment and part redevelopment of the Guildhall complex.

Ongoing use of the Council chamber – by the Council – has been agreed, but the proposals also involve the “creation of a business club, serviced office venue and associated cafe / restaurant units”.

The retention of public access to the historic parts of the site has been generally welcomed.

However, the failure of the new coalition administration, 12 months ago, to seek open market interest in the modern part of the site has led to widespread concern.

An opportunity it to maximise income by providing residential accommodation on the site appears to have been lost.

Taxpayers therefore still face a potential bill of up to £7 million.

Residents will be hoping that the final proposals will eliminate this subsidy and transfer any risk to commercial developers

York Council QUANGO set new targets

A watchdog committee will be told next week what the targets for the Councils wholly owned “Make it York” (MIY) organisation will be.

York’s image to be improved as alcohol dominates City centre economy

MIY has been the centre of controversy since it took over the management of City centre activities 12 months ago.

It has just reported a £29,000 “profit” for last year …..but only after receiving nearly £1 million from local taxpayers.

Now the Council is saying that the subsidy for 2016/17 must be used to meet a range of targets which include;

Sustaining/creating “high value jobs” (Taxpayer contribution £179k) – This includes inward investment, account management with “500 jobs created above the national median wage”. In 2015/16 MIY claimed to have created 233 new jobs (against a target of 700) of which only 167 (target 500) where “high value”
Cultural/visual identity (£120k) – improving the City’s image (!), a year round creative lighting setup for the city centre, digital signposting and what’s on, city centre public realm enhancement and “the” Eye of York development.
Bring people and businesses together (£39k) – to “enable serendipity to happen” (!)
Community based economic initiatives (£30k) – includes rolling out Bishopthorpe Road “model” to other suburban shopping areas.

In addition, the MIY will promote the Shambles market and stimulate tourism albeit no numeric targets for these activities are included in the proposed “service level agreement”

What would success look like?

Most of these objectives are notoriously difficult to monitor. In particular, most economic growth is organic and would probably happen anyway without third party stimulation.

MIY has already fallen into the trap of measuring inputs (e.g. number of meetings held) rather than outputs. It is reminiscent of the last Councils flirtation with the exotic attractions of Cannes

If the organisation can make a “profit” then they appear to care little that local traders are squeezed out by high rents or that children lose their traditional pastimes.

Performance numbers for 2015/16 will be considered at a “shareholders” meeting next week. They show that MIY missed all of their economic development targets during the last year

However, the number of potential tourists accessing Visit York information did achieve the 2 million target. The organisation also did better on business inquiries and conferences.

There are no customer satisfaction measures for city centre activities or the “markets” experience.

Total tourist numbers and entry numbers at attractions are not reported. Nor are hotel room occupancy figures.

In the wake of the City of York Trading scandal, the Council has promised a root and branch review of how its arm’s length companies and partner organisations are governed.

The sooner that happens the better.

Acomb Alive devolution plan – Only £17,000 available

The report on plans to devolve responsibility for economic development activities, in the Acomb Front Street area, to local residents and traders has been published

It confirms that, of a £30,000 investment promised by the Council in 2013, only £13000 has actually been invested.

The balance of £17,000 may now be allocated to the Acomb Alive group.

However, these are derisory sums and will do little to redeem the regeneration project promised for the area by local Councillors when seeking election last year.

Major investment is required in the streetscape and a full time coordinator will be required if the many private sector owners are to become involved in the project.

A budget of least £250,000 will be required each year.

By comparison, the City centre partner (Make it York) has a budget of over £600,000 a year while even Monks Cross will get £1 million a year from the Council to fund a leisure development there.

Two years ago the then Labour controlled Council ditched plans to create a retirement village in Acomb on land at Lowfields school

The funding was transferred to a similar project at Burnholme school on the other side fo the City.

The land at Lowfields – and a similar plot next to the library – remain unused adding to the general atmosphere of neglect in the area.

Westfield bus services face axe

Foxwood Lane (12 & 14), Gale Lane (20) and Hamilton Drive (16A) links could be lost

bus-stop1 The Council is organising “drop in” sessions at which the scale of the cuts that they plan to local bus services will be revealed.

The Council has decided to cut £350,000 from its public transport support budget so dramatic changes can be anticipated.

The Council says that members of the public will have the opportunity to give their views on the services proposed for withdrawal or alteration between Monday 11 April and Friday 6 May, either by emailing buses@york.gov.uk or through drop-in sessions (“details to be announced nearer the time”).

The Council claims that public feedback will be considered as part of a report which will be taken to an Executive Member Transport and Planning public meeting on Thursday 19 May.

A final decision on the services to be withdrawn or altered will be taken at this meeting and it is anticipated that the changes will take effect from Sunday 28 August.

The services which the council currently subsidises and which may be altered, reduced or withdrawn are:
• Monday to Saturday daytime services: 12, 19, 20, 27, 36, 627, 637 and 647
• Evening services: 10, 11, 14, 18
• Sunday services: 11, 12, 13, 14,16a and 19

For existing timetables click here

So far the Council has not released details of alternative provision. As a minimum, residents who depend on the bus service to get around will expect Dial and Ride services to be expanded. There is also likely to be a call for the option, for pensioners to be able to choose transport tokens (instead of a bus pass), to be reintroduced. The tokens can be used to pay taxi fares.

ftr bus in York

Eighty per cent of bus services are commercial in York and are not subsidised by the council. Local authorities across the country have the discretion to provide financial support for local bus services where the commercial bus market does not provide such services, but it is not a statutory duty.

Bus usage in York has increased during recent years following a slump when the last Labour Council pulled out of public transport modernisation plans like the ftr “superbus” project.

The Council has consistently refused to publish weekly reliability stats for bus services in the city

To find out more about the bus travel in York visit www.itravelyork.info

York Council set to plunge further into debt

It looks like the York Council will be borrowing more money next year.

Hopes that the new administration would avoid using the £9 million reserved to subsidise the York Central project have been dashed and £900,000 remains in the budget for works to the Guildhall. £15.714 million is earmarked for expenditure on the community stadium project.

How the debts are forecast to increase

Over £40 million of expenditure is being slipped from the current year into 2016/17 according to papers which will be discussed next week

The additional expenditure means that around 13% of the Council taxes that York residents pay will in future be soaked up by capital and interest repayments.

In total Councillors are being asked to add £5.5 million to the City’s debt burden next week.

A full list of expenditure proposals can be viewed by clicking here

click

York Council releases latest – more comprehensive – performance stats

Unemployment low, forecast 12% increase in crime levels, poor housing management performance,

The latest performance figures from the York Council provide a lot more information about public service standards in the City. It is a welcome improvement from the “dark ages” between 2011 and 2015 when little was revealed and Freedom of Information requests flourished

Environment KPIs click to access

The Council is reporting a big over-spend on the costs of looking after children from broken homes. Car parking income is already £282,000 below budgeted levels, and the Council has, of course, received no income from ANPR enforcement on Coppergate.

One worrying trend is on crime where “significant increases are forecast in the violent crime, criminal damage and burglary of non-dwellings”. With elections for the role of Police and Crime Commissioner coming up in May, candidates can expect to be questioned closely on their plans to reverse crime trends in the City.

As you would expect, performance in other areas varies. No one expects perfection – just a solid response to any evidence of declining standards.

The only department that still hasn’t adjusted to the new, more open, culture appears to be the Housing department. The Housing Revenue Account looks like it will underspend by £480,000 this year – yet many estate regeneration projects remain on the shelf.

Housing KPIs click

Housing KPIs lack information about contact volumes, complaint levels. repair numbers and customer satisfaction levels. There is no exception reporting. No “longest outstanding issue” figures are provided.

Housing have also produced a new “business plan” which singularly fails to identify any administrative savings despite a heavy investment in technology. The lamentable condition of many estates – particularly communal spaces and in garage areas – together with growing issues like the lack of off street car parking, is largely ignored.

The Council’s Executive when it meets next week should send the housing documents back for a rethink.

Detailed KPIs can be found behind these links:

York Council plans 3% Council Tax increase

Details are emerging this evening of the Council’s budget plans for 2016/17.

Council Tax will increase by 3%, of which 2% will be ring-fenced to help with social care costs.

Council house rents will be reduced by 1% (in line with central government instructions). This will mean cuts in repairs budgets, although the housing account is showing a £20 million accumulated surplus.

The Council is to spend £234,000 more to fund “additional Community Safety Hub officers” to cover additional enforcement around dog fouling, street drinking, licensing infringement and noise enforcement plus ” a reactive service for street services to deal with fly-tipping, graffiti, litter and weeds” which would be a welcome step forward.

Another welcome improvement will be an investment of an additional £100,000 to help tackle mental health issues, while the completion of the Local Plan will cost another £350,000 and an update of the strategic flood risk assessment will cost £60,000.

An extra £74,000 will be used to increase Councillors pay.

Some of the more eye-catching cuts include:

£350,000 cut in bus subsidies. Number 20 service to be scrapped.
£1.1 million cut in adult social care provision
£1.3 million cut in education support (schools are funded directly by the government)
Reductions in public garden and tree maintenance
Handing over allotment management to users
Theatre Royal (revenue) grants scrapped.
Less on Public Health (drugs, alcohol, smoking, dentistry and sexual health)
Fewer health checks

Many residents will be looking at the Council capital investment plans to see whether the excesses of the last administration – which doubled the debt per head of population figure in the City – have been reversed.

York Council indecision on new Chief Executive?

Indecision York seems likely to be without a permanent replacement for its Chief Executive for at least another 6 months.

Papers published for a meeting taking place on 1^st February reveal that a review of the Council’s management structure, commissioned last June, has apparently still not been concluded.

The report blames ongoing financial pressures for the delays, although the Chief Executives post has been filled on a temporary basis (at full salary) for over 6 months.

It now appears that the report on a new structure may now be available in March. A £150,000 a year saving on salary costs is being achieved from 1^st April by deleting a post dealing with “transformation and change”

Staff working in the Chief Executives Department are being transferred to other management groups suggesting that the Council may be thinking of abolishing the role of Chief Executive altogether.

The Council will, however, now move to appoint a permanent Director of Public Health on a salary of around £100,000.

The Council will also make a permanent appointment to the post of “City and Environmental Services”. Essentially this is the role formerly held by Bill Woolley who retired over three years ago. It is responsible for planning and transport policy. The post will also attract a pay level of around £100,000 pa. The Council says that to minimise recruitment costs this post will be “advertised externally on City of York Council Jobs Website and promoted through the Council social media channels”. Minimal advertising of vacancies is usually a tactic that a Council adopts when it has “someone in mind” for the post.

Recent events – including the Councils response to the flooding crisis – suggest that there is a lack of effective leadership in the authority. Taking over 12 months to find a permanent appointment for the post which is responsible for driving the administrative side of the Council is, at best, complacent and at worst negligent.

The York Council is now desperately short of experienced management capacity.

Councillors need to act quickly and decisively to fill the void.

« Previous
1
…
23
24
25
26
27
…
55
Next »