Have a say on Arun Council proposals to cut £2m

The feedback will help the council to map out its programme – known as “Arun Priorities” – for 2013-17 and will also be a factor in determining where the axe will fall.

Chief executive Ian Sumnall told the council’s cabinet on Monday that while Arun’s financial position was “relatively good”, there was a “serious financial situation” the council needed to address, to cut spending by £2m.

The cabinet had agreed at its meeting last month to make the cutbacks mainly in 2013-14, and at Monday’s meeting agreed the timetable for the consultation.

In a report, he warned Arun’s funding from central government would be reducing “dramatically” and that the consultation was likely to include proposals making savings of a minimum £1.75m and maximum of approximately £3m.

The proposals will be worked up this autumn, with seminars for councillors and a survey of Arun’s Wavelength panel of residents who will be asked for their view on existing services next month.

Every aspect of the council’s services will be looked at in depth by the councillors, before the full council votes in March on the draft proposals it will send out for consultation in April/May.

People and organisations, will have the opportunity to put forward alternative suggestions, and spell out what they feel are higher priority services and which are lower priority.

Councillors are expected to make their final decisions based on the feedback and analysis by officers just over a year from now.

Cabinet member Roger Elkins said: “It’s going to be much tougher to achieve savings going forward.”

Council leader Gill Brown agreed. “One of the reasons we are in this strong financial situation at the moment is because of the difficult decisions we took two years ago. As Roger Elkins said, it is going to be more difficult in future.”

Earlier in the meeting Arun’s head of finance Alan Peach said “robust financial management” and positive actions in the last financial year had improved the council’s financial situation by about £810,000. Instead of having to take £185,000 from its reserves, the council had been able to contribute £625,000 to them, and they now stood at almost £10m.