Report No: 21/2010 Public Agenda Item: Yes

Title: Capital Plan Budget for 2010/11 to 2013/14

Wards Affected:

All Wards in Torbay

To: CabinetCouncil

On: 2 February 20103 February 2010

Key Decision: Yes – Ref X34/2009

Change to Budget:

Yes Change to PolicyFramework:

No

Contact Officer: Martin Phillips Telephone: 01803 207285 E.mail: Martin.phillips@torbay.gov.uk

1. What we are trying to achieve and the impact on our customers

1.1 The Capital Plan is a means by which the Council delivers key parts of its current aims and objectives, and this report carries out an initial review of the level of new resources likely to be available for capital spending over the next four years in order to achieve these aims.

2. Recommendation(s) for decision

2.1 That Council be recommended to approve the Capital Plan Budget for 2010/11 – 2013/14.

2.2 That Council notes that it is proposed that prudential borrowing is used to support schemes in 2011/12 for Torre Abbey Phase Two and Princes Pier Infrastructure, subject to the grant funding for the schemes being approved and that no alternative funding streams can be identified. The costs of this prudential borrowing to be reflected in future year budgets.

2.3 That Council notes that, in line with changes in Capital Regulations from April 2010, it is proposed to allow the disposal costs of an asset to be met from the capital receipt subject to these costs not exceeding 2% of the receipt.

2.4 That Council be recommended, as a consequence of changes in 2009/10 accounting guidance in relation to PFI schemes, to approve the 2009/10 Authorised Limit for external debt at £175 million and the Operational Boundary for external debt Limit at £154 million.

2.5 That Council be recommended to approve the 2010/11 Prudential Indicators (including the Authorised Limit for external debt) set out in Appendix 2 to this Report, subject to approval of the Revenue Budget and Council Tax for 2010/11.

3. Key points and reasons for recommendations

3.1 The Council needs to roll forward its 4-year Capital Budget to enable forward planning of both the current capital programme and any additional projects for which new funding can be identified.

3.2 It should be noted that as the Capital Plan is updated every quarter for new and changes to projects and their funding, there is not usually a significant number of changes to the Plan from this review.

3.3 In summary, the proposed package of amendments to the Capital Budget over the next 4-year period is as follows-

£m FundingNew ProjectsPerformance Reward Grant £1.500 GrantSingle Person View £0.200 RevenueAsset Disposal costs £0.200 Capital ReceiptSupported Borrowing 2011/12 – 13/14 £6.000 Supported BorrowingTotal (new resources) £7.900

3.4 As part of the 2010/11 budget process, Members have considered the Corporate Capital Strategy including the Capital Projects Reserve List and the Corporate Asset Management Plan and these documents, together with the accompanying reports, highlighted the significant demand for investment in assets used for service delivery across all Council services in contrast to the limited predictions of new capital resources available.

3.5 The Mayor and Cabinet undertook an initial review of the potential Capital Budget for the period 2010/11 - 2013/14 at their meeting in December 2009 (report 269/2009 refers) and this was considered by Overview and Scrutiny in January 2010. That report contained detail of the issues to be considered in relation to the Capital Plan. This report is a summary report and should be considered in conjunction with that report and provides any updated information since that report was considered.

3.6 The Capital Plan has been updated for the latest monitoring information from Quarter Three 2009/10 and will continue to be updated on a quarterly basis as schemes are approved and timing of schemes revised.

3.7 Members will, however, note that there are still a significant number of desirable projects on the Capital Reserve List for which no obvious funding has been identified in this report. In addition this report and the proposed funding of the capital plan needs to be considered in the light of current economic conditions.

3.8 Appendix 1 provides the proposed 4-year Capital Plan Budget for the period 2010/11 – 2013/14 incorporating the suggested additions for recommendation to Council.

3.9 Appendix 2 provides draft Prudential Indicators for 2010/11 and future years, including the Council’s Authorised Borrowing Limit, as required under the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) Code of Practice, based upon current information. As a consequence of changes in 2009/10 accounting guidance in relation to PFI schemes, the Council is asked to approve the 2009/10 Authorised Limit for external debt at £175 million and the Operational Boundary for external debt Limit at £154 million. The increase reflects the introduction of long term liability for the Council’s PFI scheme. This change is an early consequence of the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standards.

3.10 In the light of the prevailing economic conditions and the current requirement of £10 million of receipts, any additional assets identified for disposal or additional capital receipts should continue to be allocated to fund the current capital plan rather than be allocated to new schemes.

3.11 The plan also relies on a total of £57 million of borrowing of which £45 million is prudential. A significant part of this level of prudential borrowing is linked to the approval of the Castle Circus Regeneration project in June 2009.

3.12 For 2010/11 the Council is in the third and final year of the Government’s current comprehensive spending review and the majority of government funding for capital in 2010/11 has already been announced. There are only a few capital grants expected to be announced for 2010/11. A modest assumption has been made for Government funding beyond the current announcements for 2011/12 onwards.

3.13 There are a number of other projects being developed, such as the projects associated with the Mayoral Vision, that do not feature on the Capital Plan as it is anticipated that no direct Council funding will be required. However any Council land or other assets used by developers to develop these projects will have a value. In addition the Council is also able to approve assets for disposal or transfer for sale, community asset transfer, affordable housing, transfer to alternative providers such as the economic development company and long term “strategic” leases such as to the proposed joint venture company.

3.14 In light of the uncertainly of capital allocations in future years and the level of capital receipts required, officers will continue to review the current capital plan to ensure that the plan reflects the allocation of funding to the key priorities of the Council and report back to members on potential revisions to the capital plan.

For more detailed information on this proposal please refer to the supporting information attached.

Richard ThorpeChief Finance Officer

Supporting information to Report 21/2010

A1. Introduction and history

A1.1 The current approved 4-year Capital Plan Budget for 2009/10 – 2012/13 totals £155 million. The Plan Budget needs to be reviewed and rolled forward to encompass 2013/14.

A1.2 The Mayor and Cabinet undertook an initial review of the current demands for capital investment and the likely resources available to fund them.

A1.3 The recommendations by Cabinet on 8th December 2009 were as follows –

(i) that the draft Capital Plan Budget for 2010/11 – 2013/14 be distributed for scrutiny;

(ii) that any specific additional proposals for the Capital Plan Budget for 2010/11 – 2013/14 be developed and brought to the Mayor and Cabinet for consideration in February 2010; and

(iii) that Members note that, in light of the uncertainly of capital allocations in future years and the level of capital receipts required, that officers will review the current capital plan to ensure that the plan reflects the allocation of funding to the key priorities of the Council and report back to members on potential revisions to the capital plan.

A1.4 The proposed capital budget for 2010/11 – 2013/14 is attached at Appendix 1. This draft plan is the capital plan as reported for quarter three 2009/10 adjusted for any likely additions for new funding.

A1.5 The Plan for 2010/11 – 2013/14 totals £109 million of which £59 million is expected to be spent in 2010/11 and the remaining £50 million is planned to be spent in the 3 years 2011/12 to 2013/14.

A1.6 Modest assumptions have been made for funding for the next CSR period starting 2011/12. This is a key issue as the rolling four year capital plan should reflect likely funding levels to enable council and service planning. However the press speculation is that there could be significant reductions in grants and supported borrowing in the future therefore at this stage only a modest assumption of future funding of £2 million each year from 2011/12 has been made. This is a key risk for the Council in the medium term.

A1.7 The current capital plan (quarter three 2009/10) shows a planned four year expenditure of over £155 million, Within this there are a number of significant projects such as the rebuild of Torquay Community College, Paignton Library Hub and the Civic Hub. Key to the overall programme of capital works is the use of £79 million of external grant funding which reflects well on the Council seeking out external funding options.

A2. Updates to Capital Plan 2010/11 – 2013/14

A2.1 Performance Reward Grant

The Council was allocated £0.9 million of (revenue) pump priming grant in relation to meeting Local Area Agreement stretch targets. If successful the Council could earn a maximum of £3.9 million of performance reward grant. This grant would be allocated as 50% revenue grant and 50% capital grant. For the purposes of this report reward grant of £3.0 million has been assumed of which £1.5 million will be capital. This will be updated when the final grant allocation is confirmed during 2010.

A2.2 The Torbay Strategic Partnership (TSP), who have been directly involved with the Local Area Agreement process, have advised that the reward grant should be allocated 50% to the services and partners that achieved the targets and 50% to be allocated by a bid process to the TSP by the Strategic Commissioning Body. This allocation will be subject to the 50/50 revenue/capital grant allocation.

Grant Revenue £ Revenue % Capital £ Capital % Total £Targets £.750m 25% £.750m 25% £1.5m

TSP Bids £.750m 25% £.750m 25% £1.5m

Total £1.5m 50% £1.5m 50% £3.0m

A2.3 Any allocation of capital must be for eligible capital purposes (the definition of capital that local authorities have to comply with). It is expected that any bids for capital funding from reward grant will include schemes on the capital reserve list.

A2.4 Although the TSP have been closely involved with the Local area Agreements and can advise on any basis of allocation, it should be noted that the reward grant is allocated to Torbay Council and as a result any allocation of Council resources is a Council decision.

A2.5 Single Person View System

This IT project, linking data from several separate systems, costing £200,000, is an “invest to save” scheme which will be repaid over 3 years from revenue savings.

A2.6 Torre Abbey Phase Two

The Council has been successful in passing the first stage in its bid for funding for phase two of the renovation works at Torre Abbey and will now work towards the next stage in 2010. To support this next stage of work the Council will receive grants to meet the costs of developing the project of £234,000.

A2.7 The scheme has an estimated total cost of £5 million. The Council’s contribution will be approximately £1.4 million of which an element could be allocated from the Childrens’ capital budget and the Council’s central repair and maintenance budget. This would leave an unfunded balance to be identified. Assuming the

funding bid meets the future stage requirements, this is a significant funding issue that has to be resolved by 2011/12. As a consequence it is proposed that prudential borrowing is used to support Torre Abbey Phase Two, subject to the grant funding for the schemes being approved and subject to no alternative funding streams being identified. The costs of this prudential borrowing to be reflected in future year budgets.

A2.8 Structural Repairs to Sea Front Infrastructure

In response to the identified issues on seafront infrastructure the Council has applied for funding from the Environment Agency. The bid for these schemes identified a four year programme of works for Haldon Pier with a total estimated grant bid of £4.5 m and a five year programme of works for Princess Pier with a total estimated grant bid of £3.3m. In addition to the works to be funded from this grant the Council will fund from its own resources £1.8m for Haldon Pier and £1.4m for Princess Pier. The Haldon Pier works, which include rock armouring, are currently underway and funded from Prudential Borrowing. The Council funding for Princess Pier has yet to be identified. As a consequence it is proposed that prudential borrowing is used to support schemes in 2011/12 for Princes Pier Infrastructure, subject to the grant funding for the schemes being approved and subject to no alternative funding streams being identified. The costs of this prudential borrowing to be reflected in future year budgets.

A2.9 Supported Borrowing 2011/12 onwards

The next financial year is the last of the current three year funding settlement. 2011/12 will be the first year of the new settlement. There is considerable uncertainty over potential significant reductions to future year settlements. As a consequence only a modest assumption of supported borrowing for primarily schools and transport has been made of an allocation of £2 million each year from 2011/12. This assumption has been reflected in both the Treasury Management Strategy and future year revenue budgets.

A3. Economic Conditions

A3.1 The current economic uncertainty has potential to impact on the Capital Plan. Impacts could be a reduction in the value and number of assets disposed of to support the Capital Plan. The total value of receipts required to finance the capital plan is £10 million. Whilst at this stage these receipts are still considered achievable over the life of the capital plan there may be a short term reduction in values which could result in the Council “land banking” these assets.

A3.2 It is likely that the level of section 106 agreements will continue to fall as a result of the reduced number of developments within Torbay. It is considered that this will impact on the later years of the Capital Plan due to the process of allocating monies to appropriate schemes.

A3.3 Conversely the downturn could result in more competitive tenders for work being received by the Council. Any “saving” on a project’s costs will, unless funding is ring fenced, be allocated to other projects rather than be used for enhancements.

A4. Capital Receipts

A4.1 The disposal of surplus and under-used assets to generate capital resources is critical to the development of the Capital Plan Budget although it is clear that the Council’s future Capital programme cannot depend upon capital receipts alone.

A4.2 The existing Capital Budget anticipates £10 million capital receipts from assets already earmarked for disposal. External agents have been contracted to market some of these sites and the adverts for some sales have already been placed.

A4.3 In view of the uncertainty over realising capital receipts and generating the £10 million required to finance the current Capital Plan, using further monies from as yet un received disposals for commitment to new investment at this time is considered a risk.

A4.4 New Capital Finance Regulations are expected to be in force from 31st March 2010 that will allow the disposal costs of all (non housing sales) to be met from capital receipts. As DCLG believe the overall costs of each disposal are unpredictable and could be large, there is a ceiling to these costs so that the amount of disposal costs of an asset to be met from the capital receipt must not exceed 2% of the receipt. Currently Councils have to fund the costs of disposals from revenue which can act as a disincentive to dispose of assets. As the Council is not increasing its estimate of capital receipts being generated, the introduction of disposal costs in the capital plan will be an additional cost that will need to be funded from the capital plan. It is proposed that the Council contingency is used to ensure the capital plan remains funded.

A5. Section 106 (Planning gain) monies –

Due to the continuing economic conditions and its impact on developers in Torbay there is still uncertainty over the future receipt of s106 money. Although an agreement may have been signed with a developer, unless the “trigger” action is reached the developer is not liable to pay money to the Council. Any revision of the Capital Plan will only include/incorporate s106 funding when received or when there is considerable certainty over its receipt.

A6. Prudential Indicators

A6.1 The Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy Code of Practice recommends a set of Indictors designed to help Councils to ensure their capital investment plans are “affordable”, “prudent” and “sustainable”. To support this CIPFA have issued a revised Prudential Code in autumn 2009.

The Indicators are as follows –

Affordability:

Ratio of Financing Costs to Net Revenue streamIncremental impact of capital investment decisions on Council TaxEstimates of capital expenditureEstimates of Capital Financing RequirementAuthorised limit for external debt

Operational boundary for external debtPrudence:

Net external borrowing does not exceed, except in the short term, the Capital Financing Requirement in the preceding year and the next three years.

The matters required to be taken into account by the Council in setting or revising their prudential indicators are as follows –

Affordability - implications for Council Tax & the Council’s resources generally

Prudence and sustainability - implications of borrowing & whole life costs

Value for money - option appraisal Stewardship of assets - asset management planning Service objectives - strategic planning for the authority Practicality - achievability of the forward plan

A6.2 Members will be aware that these issues are taken into account strategically through the development of the Asset Management Plan, the Corporate Capital Strategy, the Capital Projects Reserve List, the Medium Term Financial Plan and the current Revenue & Capital Budget review process.

A6.3 The Council itself is required to review and formally approve its Prudential Indicators in advance of the new financial year, alongside approval of the amended Capital Budget.

A6.4 Provisional Indicators for 2010/11 and future years, based on the assumption the Capital Budget proposed in this Report is approved, are produced at Appendix 2 to this Report. As they are dependent upon finalisation of the Revenue Budget-setting process, they may change as a result of decisions taken before the level of Council Tax for 2010/11 is determined.

A7. Risk assessment of preferred option

A7.1 Outline of significant key risks

The main risks associated with reviewing the Capital Plan Budget are:

Impact of economic conditions of capital receipts and s106 contributions Uncertainty over future year (2011/12 onwards) of government

allocations for supported borrowing and capital grants. The effect on service provision of not undertaking certain high priority

projects, particularly if access to key assets will be limited in the future because of public safety concerns.

The robustness of estimates of likely resources. Realistic assumptions of costs.

These issues were considered in more detail in the Capital Budget Review (report 269/2009).

A8. Other Options

A8.1 Options for addition/amendment to the Capital Plan Budget were considered as part of the capital budget process for 20010/11 and summarised in the capital budget review.

A9. Summary of resource implications

A9.1 The resource implications are identified in the body of this report

A10. What impact will there be on equalities, environmental sustainability and crime and disorder?

A10.1 There is no immediate impact at this stage. The development of individual projects addresses these issues.

A11. Consultation and Customer Focus

A11.1 The Corporate Asset Management Team, Commissioners and Overview and Scrutiny Board are consulted throughout the Budget development process.

Appendices

Appendix 1 Capital Plan Budget 2010/11 – 2013/14Appendix 2 Prudential Indicators 2010/11

Documents available in members’ roomsNone

Background Papers:The following documents/files were used to compile this report:

Capital Strategy 2010 RevisionCapital Review 2010/11 (report 269/2009)

Appendix 2 to Report 21/2010

TORBAY COUNCIL PRUDENTIAL INDICATORS FOR 2010/11 AND FUTURE YEARS

These indicators are based on assumptions made in relation to the Council’s revenue and capital budgets for the following three years. These indicators relate very closely to assumptions on investment and borrowing within the Treasury Management Strategy.

The indicators are also based on guidance in the Prudential Code and the Practioners’ Guide to Capital Finance (both CIPFA)

Prudential Indicators for Affordability

Estimate of Ratio of Financing Costs to Net Revenue stream

This indicator shows how much of the net Revenue Budget is used to pay the costs of borrowing and other credit. It includes the costs of interest on borrowing and for setting aside provision for the repayment of principal, offset by investment income. These costs are then shown as a percentage of the net Revenue Budget (to be met from General Grants, including Area Based Grant, and Council Tax). The change year on year shows the effect that capital investment has upon the overall financial strategy of the Council.

As capital projects take time to complete the effect on the Revenue Budget builds up over time. i.e. the full year effect of spending in 2010/11 is not felt until 2011/12 and so on.

This indicator cannot be finally calculated until the Revenue Budget is agreed – an illustrative 2010/11 Revenue Budget figure of £134 m has been used in the calculation.

2009/10Revised Estimate

2010/11Estimate

2011/12Estimate

2012/13 Estimate

Ratio of Financing Costs to Net Revenue stream

%7.46

%7.88

%8.27

%9.60

In calculating this indicator the following assumptions are made –

Payment to Devon County Council for debt administered by them but “transferred” to this Authority in 1998 is reflected in the calculation

The calculation does not include Government support towards the costs of Borrowing paid through Revenue Support Grant

The calculation does not include any repayment by services of any service (saving) funded prudential borrowing.

Estimate of Incremental impact of capital investment decisions on Council Tax

This is the estimate of the incremental effect on Council Tax of capital investment decisions being recommended to Council in this report over and above the existing 4-year Capital Budget already approved. It demonstrates the cost of decisions to increase the Capital Budget, which are included in the proposed Council Tax (Band D).

This indicator is calculated by comparing the revenue cost of the existing Capital Budget with the estimated cost of the proposed new Budget. It does not imply that Council Tax has to be increased by this amount but it indicates how much of the Band D Tax represents the marginal cost of new investment.

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

£ £ £ £Incremental impact of capital investment decisions on Council Tax

0.09 2.04 9.30 12.45

Equivalent % of Band D Council Tax (Torbay element only)

0.01% 0.16% 0.70% 0.92%

The calculation includes any expected changes in –

Annual interest costs of new Borrowing Additional Minimum Revenue Provision for repayment of principal New direct revenue funding of capital schemes falling on Council Tax (if any) Estimated increase or savings on revenue running costs arising from new

investment

Prudential Indicators for Prudence

Net Borrowing and the Capital Financing Requirement

This indicator measures the Council’s underlying need to borrow for a capital purpose over the medium term. It is derived from Balance Sheet values including Fixed Assets and increases as a result of Capital spending not financed immediately from capital receipts, grants, contributions and revenue.

2008/09Actual

2009/10Estimate

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

Borrowing as at 31/03/xx £111m £132m £132m £132m £132mLess Investments as at 31/03/xx (£75m) (£88m) (£47m) (£24m) (£24m)Net Borrowing £36m £44m £85m £108m £108m

2008/09Restated

2009/10Estimate

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

Capital Financing Requirement £124m £132m £158m £170m £166m

In line with best practice, the Council has adopted the CIPFA Code of Practice for Treasury Management and has an integrated Treasury Management Policy and therefore does not associate borrowing with particular schemes or types of expenditure. External borrowing can arise as a consequence of all the financial transactions of the Council and in daily cash management no distinction can be made between revenue and capital cash, however over the medium term borrowing should

only be undertaken for a capital purpose. To demonstrate this Net Borrowing except in the short-term) should not exceed the CFR.

Prudential Indicators for Capital Expenditure, External Debt & Treasury Management

Estimated Capital Expenditure

This is the Estimated Capital spend for the forthcoming and future years as per the proposed 4-year Capital Plan Budget presented at Appendix 1 to this Report.

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14£m £m £m £m

Existing Capital Budget * 58 36 3 3Proposed Increase subject to approval

1 5 2 2

Proposed Increase in Long Term Liabilities

0 0 0 0

Capital Expenditure in year 59 41 5 5

As reported to Cabinet for Quarter Three 2009/10 in February 2010

Estimate of the Capital Financing Requirement (CFR)

This indicator measures the Council’s underlying need to borrow for a capital purpose. It is derived from Balance Sheet values including Fixed Assets and increases as a result of Capital spending not financed immediately from capital receipts, grants, contributions and revenue.

2008/09Restated

2009/10Estimate

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

Capital Financing Requirement £124m £132m £158m £170m £166m

Authorised Limit for External Debt

This is the Statutory “affordable borrowing limit” required under section 3(1) of the Local Government Act 2003. Impending breach would require the Council to take avoiding action. The Limit approved for 2009/10 is £175m. Treasury management has kept the level of external debt during the year (maximum expected £132m) within this limit.

Included in this limit is any long term liability the Council has. With the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standards the Council is likely to have more long term liabilities. As a result in 2009/10 the limit was revised to reflect the changes in accounting for PFI schemes.

2009/10Revised

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

Borrowing £159m £203m £207m £211mOther Long-term Liabilities £16m £21m £21m £21mTotal Authorised limit £175m £224m £228m £232m

The proposed limits have been calculated having regard to the Council’s existing commitments, approved Capital Budget and the proposals for new spending contained in the Capital Budget Report. In addition to the Basic assumptions above, the Limits allow for the following – consistency with the Council’s Treasury Management & Annual Investment

Strategy an anticipation of the “worst case scenario” for daily cashflow providing headroom

over the Operational Boundary and incorporating risk analysis of slippage in spending and income receipts

the option to borrow funds to finance the Capital Plan budget in advance of projected spending if market forces indicate this is financially advantageous

provision to allow Prudential Borrowing for new “spend-to-save” schemes or to consider alternative financing options

the projected Capital Financing Requirement above Repayment of Outstanding “Transferred Debt” of £22m currently administered by

Devon County Council

Operational Boundary for External Debt

This is the most likely, but not worst case scenario for day-to-day cash management purposes. This indicator provides an early warning for a potential breach in the Authorised Limit. The CIPFA Prudential Code recognises that this Indicator needs to provide a realistic pointer that treasury operations are within affordable and statutory limits. Occasional breach of this limit is not serious but sustained breach would indicate that prudential boundaries the Council has set may be exceeded, requiring immediate Council action.

2009/10Revised

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13

Borrowing £138m £153m £157m £161mOther Long-term Liabilities £16m £21m £21m £21mTotal Operational Boundary £154m £174m £178m £182m

The proposed Limit is based upon the same assumptions used for the Authorised Limit but assumes a more likely scenario for slippage in spending and income receipts than taken for the Authorised Limit. It does not have the additional headroom for unusual cash movements and is consistent with the cost of financing estimates used for the purpose of setting the Revenue Budget.

Prudential Indicator in respect of Treasury Management

The Council has adopted the CIPFA Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice and Cross Sectorial Guidance Notes. The CIPFA Code of Practice on Treasury Management was adopted by the Council on 17th February 2002.

The Treasury Management Strategy is closely linked to the Council’s Capital expenditure plans. Any proposals to increase the Council’s external debt for capital purposes will be undertaken in accordance with that Strategy. The Prudential

Indicators for Treasury Management, which form part of the Council’s 2010/11 Treasury Management Strategy, are provided and explained further in that document to be presented to Council in February. The Code was revised in November 2009 and the key changes have been incorporated into this strategy. A full report on the new Code will be presented to the appropriate Committee.