Item 06 Appendix 2
West Dunbartonshire Council · 4 March 2026
Back to West Dunbartonshire Council — 4 March 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer Amanda Graham Saving Ref: 2627 CCF02 Saving Title Review of Clydebank Town Hall Summary of Savings Proposal Clydebank Town Hall (CTH) is currently open as standard Tuesday to Friday with flexible opening outwith this for events which generate income. In light of property costs, operations could be revised further with a review of usage undertaken to ascertain the most appropriate opening hours. Option 1 – CTH open three days a week (£15k saving) Access for public, elected members and support staff would be maintained on three week days. Building would continue to open on additional days to support pre-booked events as the cost is mitigated by the income generated. Option 2 - CTH open four days with reduced hours daily (£8k saving) Reduced opening hours would be introduced, for example, 9am to 1pm each day, or 1pm to 5pm. Building would open to support pre-booked events as the cost is mitigated by income generated. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: Under Option 1 and 2, the building would be opened for pre-booked events. The museum and gallery in the Town Hall would be impacted by reduced hours. Members Services would require to adjust operations to account for revised opening. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: Under Option 1 and 2, consideration would be given to staff contracts, place and hours of work with consultation required. Staff may be in detriment. Reputational Risk: The options carry reputational risk around perceived reduction in provision. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 Option £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 15 0 15 0 15 0 2 8 0 8 0 8 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A *May reduce depending on any ongoing rate liability Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1344 APPENDIX 2
Page 2
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Amanda Graham Saving Ref: 2627 CCF03 Saving Title Review of Contact Centre Summary of Savings Proposal Currently Citizen Services operates the Customer Contact Centre, Housing Repairs Contact Centre and provides a front of house service at 16 Church Street. The Council recognises that for many people, their digital skills, literacy or deprivation can prevent them from accessing the internet and for this reason it is important to maintain alternative means of contacting the Council. It is recognised that for a number of people the option to call rather than access services online is a preference rather than a necessity. Currently the contact centre employs 9 FTE staff. Under this option, this number would be reduced by 1 FTE. Work would continue to promote alternative methods of contacting or reporting issues to the Council including via email and via the website. This would generate a saving of circa £30k per annum. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: The contact centre acts as a first point of engagement for a significant number of Council services. Reducing staffing would still retain telephone services for those without internet access or for those requiring urgent assistance. Each member of staff within the centre answers an average of 300 calls per week. Reduction in staff in turn would reduce the calls answered by this amount and increase wait times, currently there is a 3 minute response time target. This is an average derived from all calls throughout the year and there are times when we are currently not meeting this target due to call volume. A reduction by one member of staff would increase the average call answer time to 6 minutes meaning at peak times the call wait would be upwards of 30 minutes. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: This option would impact on the headcount of staff. Employees would be supported through Council policies including Switch. Reputational Risk: There is a risk that people’s call behaviour does not change in spite of highlighting the digital first approach and wait times within the contact centre increase. It should also be noted that service changes which are delivering financial efficiencies for the Council can also add to the call volume and increase wait times. Saving (Cumulative) 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE
Page 3
15 1 30 1 30 1 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1343
Page 4
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Amanda Graham Saving Ref: 2627 CCF08 Saving Title Full cost school meals Summary of Savings Proposal Delivering a catering service across all education services in West Dunbartonshire including early learning, primary, secondary and additional support needs settings cost the Council £5.1m gross in 2024/25 inclusive of staffing, operational and food costs. Net expenditure was £4.2m, with income of £0.919m from paid for meals across the school estate, credited to Education. Currently free school meals are provided to all pupils in early years, P1 to P5 pupils in primary, all pupils in ASN and pupils at every age group entitled to free school meals by means of entitlement in every setting. In 2024/25 the revenue support grant received by WDC contained a figure of £3.96m (including summer holiday provision of £0.58m) for delivering school meals (paid and free). The Council currently provides a further £800k subsidy to deliver the service. The current cost to pupils of a school meal is £3.19. To fully recover the cost of delivery, the charge for each paid for school meal would need to increase by £2.54 to £5.73 per meal (based on 2024/25 prices). Option 1 Recover all expenditure not covered by grant or income - increase cost of paid for school meals to at least £5.73 per lunch (89% increase on the 2024/25 price) Option 2 Recover 50% of expenditure not covered by grant or income - increase cost of paid for school meals to at least £4.39 per lunch (44% increase on the 2024/25 price) Option 3 Recover 25% of expenditure not covered by grant or income - increase cost of paid for school meals to at least £3.71 per lunch (22% increase on the 2024/25 price) Option 4 Deliver only free school meals which are externally funded and remove the provision of paid for school meals across all settings. As almost 80% of meals are free and many costs are not variable the cessation of paid for meals would save £0.285m. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: Increases in school meal prices to this level is likely to have a significant impact on demand for those meals that are not free. There is a significant risk that people would not pay the costs. Strategic Risk Register: N/A
Page 5
People Risk: It is likely increasing costs charged for school meals will impact on uptake and therefore there is a risk that demand for school meals significantly decreases. With less demand for the service, there would be less staff required therefore there is a risk to employee numbers. Reputational Risk: School meals deliver healthy, nutritionally balanced food and there is a correlation between nutrition, diet, behaviour, attainment and health outcomes. There is a reputational risk from increasing costs to a level which many are likely to deem unaffordable particularly in the current financial environment with increasing cost pressures on families. Option 4, removing provision of paid for service would set us apart from all other councils and also presents a reputational risk in terms of equity of provision and highlighting/stigmatising FSM by means of entitlement particularly in secondary school settings. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 Option £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 361 0* 761 0 761 0 2 161 0 361 0 361 0 3 61 0 161 0 161 0 4 101 0 246 0 246 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0* - *subject to comments above regarding staffing impact Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1346
Page 6
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Amanda Graham Saving Ref: 2627 CCF09 Saving Title Reduction in Performance and Strategy Team Summary of Service Responsibilities The Performance and Strategy team leads on performance management and strategic planning across the Council with responsibility for co-ordinating the preparation of the Council’s Strategic Plan and individual service delivery plans twice yearly. In addition the team delivers the Council’s Public Performance Reporting requirements, supporting continuous improvement and co-ordinating the Local Government Benchmarking Framework (LGBF) return. Further responsibility includes strategic consultation and community engagement; equality mainstreaming; and data analysis. While this is a non-statutory service, the team supports the Council to meet statutory duties. This includes performance monitoring and gathering to demonstrate the organisation meets its statutory duty to provide best value, and leading on equality mainstreaming to ensure that it meets the statutory duty to ensure that equality and diversity are embedded into all functions and activities as required by the Equality Act 2010. Performance monitoring and reporting is required by Audit Scotland and is also a pre-requisite for some external funders. In addition, the team ensures the Council meets its requirement to contribute to LGBF. Planning for the West Dunbartonshire Strategic Plan 2027-2032 will begin in 2026 with a focus on carrying out a comprehensive strategic assessment followed by consultation and identification of performance indicators over the following year. Planning for the West Dunbartonshire Local Outcome Improvement Plan (LOIP) 2027-2037 undertaken by Communities will begin in 2026 and will require support from the Performance & Strategy Team in relation to consultation and data analysis. Under this option, a 25% reduction in the team is proposed. The service operates on a business partner model with the team of four core employees responsible for a particular area of service and a further specialism. The support provided to help the Council meet its statutory obligations would require to be maintained and therefore the removal of a Business Partner would reduce the guidance and support currently provided to services, with no support provided for operational performance information, continuous improvement or delivery planning. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: This presents a risk to all Council services as services would be required to develop, monitor and report against delivery plan performance independently. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: The option would impact on up to 1 FTE employee who would be supported through Switch.
Page 7
Reputational Risk: Potential for reputational risk if services do not have capacity to effectively develop, monitor and report against delivery plan performance. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 25 1 60 1 60 1 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1457
Page 8
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Amanda Graham Saving Ref: CCF10 Saving Title Reduction in WDLT Management Fee Summary of Savings Proposal The Council pays a management fee to West Dunbartonshire Leisure Trust (WDLT) for delivery of a range of leisure and sport services, including management of sport and leisure facilities, community facilities, sports development, Active Schools, outdoor recreation facilities and events. The proposed fee paid by the Council to WDLT for 2025/26 was £4,597,492. This was based on flat cash with a number of adjustments to incorporate costs for the 25/26 pay award, uplift for utility costs and also funding the impact of increased National Insurance payments. The fee calculation is summarised in the table below: Base Management Fee 2024/25 £3,932,592 Adjust for Interest payable on 3G Pitches (£ 65,000) Updated Base Mgt Fee £3,867,592 Pay Award (Estimated cost) £274,000 Utility Cost (DHN) £253,900 National Insurance costs £202,000 Management Fee 2025/26 £4,597,492 This fee was further adjusted to reflect the fact the three pitches were not delivered in year and therefore the £65,000 deducted for loan interest was reinstated; the final pay award cost was £257,000. This resulted in a final Management Fee of £4,645,492. The 2026/27 management fee needs to be increased by £464,750 to reflect the Strathclyde Pension employer’s contribution rate increasing to 17.5% in the coming financial year. The revised loan interest fee payable on pitches will be £42,000. Based on flat cash the assumed Management Fee for 2026/27 would be £5,068,242. Under this option, the management fee would be reduced by a set percentage, which for illustration purposes would equate to: • 1% reduction – £50,682 • 3% reduction – £152,047 • 5% reduction – £ 253,412 Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: The Council has a Service Level Agreement with the Trust around delivery of service. There is a risk that in delivering savings WDLT reduces services,
Page 9
facilities or staffing. While it would be for the Trust to decide how to deliver with a reduced management fee, the Trust does have the ability to generate additional income and use to support activities or to consider its reserves to mitigate against a service impact. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: It would be for the Trust to consider how to operate and deliver with a reduced management fee Reputational Risk: The Council has a statutory duty to ensure ‘adequate’ provision of recreation and sport facilities. If a reduction in management fee leads to a reduction in leisure services, this carries reputational risk. The reduction has been kept to a minimum level to mitigate against this. In addition it is for the Trust to decide how to deliver with a reduced fee, with options to consider the level of reserves it holds or raise additional income to meet the gap. A public consultation is currently underway to seek feedback on the range of services delivered by WDLT as part of a comprehensive review. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 Options £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1% 50 0 50 0 50 0 3% 151 0 151 0 151 0 5% 253 0 253 0 253 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1404
Page 10
Chief Officer: Amanda Graham Saving Ref: 2627 CCF11 Saving Title Removal of events Summary of Savings Proposal The Council stages two events in West Dunbartonshire each year, a firework display at Levengrove Park, Dumbarton in November and the Scottish Pipe Band Championships at the same venue in July. The cost of both events is offset by funding from the Dumbarton Common Good Fund with the fireworks receiving £15k and the pipe band event £50k. Due to oversubscription to the fund, for 2026 the two events will receive 59% of the amount applied for - £13,100 for fireworks and £34,500 for pipe bands. This will leave an unbudgeted cost pressure of £22,400 for both events to proceed. The total events budget is £28,000 which would be a saving should the events cease. It should be noted the Pipe Band would require to continue until the contract could be exited. Option 1: Cease the firework display saving £5k revenue (and £13,100 release back to Common Good) Option 2: Cease the Scottish Pipe Band Championships saving £23k revenue (and £34,500 release back to Common Good) Option 3: Cease both the firework display and Scottish Pipe Band Championships saving £28k revenue from 27/28 (and £47,600 release back to Common Good) Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: N/A Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: N/A Reputational Risk: Both events are free and well received by the public and therefore there is a reputational risk if they were to cease. In addition the Pipe Band Championships has been shown to generate economic benefit through increased visitor number and spend in local hotel, restaurants and shops. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 Option £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 5 0 5 0 5 0 2 0 0 23 0 23 0 3 5* 0 28 0 28 0 *Based on firework ceasing from 2026 and Pipe Band ceasing from 2027 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1373/1376
Page 11
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: 202627 EDU04 Saving Title Swimming Lessons Summary of Savings Proposal Currently in West Dunbartonshire, £14,320 funding is allocated to West Dunbartonshire Leisure Trust (WDLT) to fund a free eight-week course of swimming lessons to children in Primary 6 or 7 during term time. This option would remove that provision. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: Increasing risk of disadvantage and inequity as many children are not supported to learn to swim by their parents. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: This could potentially impact on the 12 WDLT employees who currently deliver approximately 128 hours of lessons over an eight week period. Reputational Risk: Removing lessons could be perceived as contradictory, given that the Council has conducted high-profile local and national campaigns, as well as a multi-agency education programme since 2021.The national campaigns promoting water safety at Loch Lomond were initiated following the deaths of 4 people in one weekend in the summer of 2021; and the tragic death in the summer of 2020 of a primary-aged child from West Dunbartonshire. Records for 2022 report 2 adults drownings in West Dunbartonshire and one in both 2023 and 2024. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 14 0 14 0 14 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1448
Page 12
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: 2627 EDU05 Saving Title Early Start Clubs Summary of Savings Proposal The Council currently offers Early Start Clubs in all primary schools to ensure no pupil starts the day without a meal. The cost per day for a child to attend is currently £2.10, with pupils in receipt of free school meals exempt from that charge. The number of pupils attending clubs across the authority is approximately 350, and as such the cost to run the service exceeds the income it generates. In 2025/26 estimated staffing costs are £246,000 and estimated income is £144,000. This means it costs the Council £102,000 to deliver. Under this proposal provision of Early Start Clubs would cease at the beginning of session 2026/27, generating a saving of £102,000. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: Ceasing the service may lead to some children not receiving breakfast resulting in an increase in children starting the day without a meal. Strategic Risk: SR02 Challenges in implementing broad-ranging school improvement to raise attainment and achievement People Risk: Currently Learning Assistants are contracted for the additional time required to operate the club. Ceasing provision would reduce their required hours. Reputational Risk: Ceasing Early Start clubs in such an area of deprivation would lead to criticism of the Council. We receive additional funding in 2025/26 to increase the capacity of our clubs from Scottish Government’s ‘Bright Start Breakfasts’ initiative, so it would be problematic to make any saving during session 2025/26 Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 67 0 102 0 102 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1436
Page 13
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: EDU08 Saving Title Charging for Instrumental Music Service tuition Summary of Savings Proposal Provision of the Instrumental Music Service (IMS) tuition is currently offered free to children and young people in our schools, with 1,014 pupils currently participating. The service is primarily funded by the Council, at a cost of £464,334, with an additional £205,000 of Scottish Government funding. To ensure the sustainability of IMS, and limit any potential reductions to the service, it is proposed that a charging structure for one to one and small group music tuition is introduced. Families in receipt of out of work benefits would be exempt from fees (this accounts for 22% of participants). Under this proposal, there are three options: Option 1: Introduce a charge of £25/hour x 40 weeks Option 2: Introduce a charge of £15/hour x 40 weeks Option 3: Introduced a charge of £5/hour x 40 weeks None of the proposed options will cover the full cost of service delivery and the charges would be introduced in August 2027 to provide implementation time including to minimise the service disruption to young people. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: In 2020/21, the Scottish Government abolished all charges for instrumental music education to ensure equitable access for all children, regardless of background. Local introduction of charging departs from this national policy intent of free access to music education and could be challenged. There is no statutory obligation on the Council to provide free instrumental music tuition, however there is a statutory obligation to deliver an education service in line with Curriculum for Excellence which entitles children and young people to receive a comprehensive and equitable education, tailored to meet their individual needs and aspirations. Reduction in service uptake may result in potentially talented students missing out on opportunities to develop their skills due to financial constraints and a possible reduction in the number of students gaining SQA music practical qualifications. Income projections are based on the assumption that eligible families will take up the offer of paid tuition, however these may not be realised. Strategic Risk Register: SR002 Implementing broad ranging school improvement People Risk: There are no staffing implications.
Page 14
Reputational Risk: Community perception that the Council is prioritising revenue over the educational and cultural development of young people. Charging for music tuition will disproportionately affect low-income families, limiting access to music education for those who cannot afford it, which is likely to lead to criticism of the Council. As the introduction of charging contradicts national policy commitments, it may be challenged. Saving (Cumulative) 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 Option £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 - £25 per hour (assuming 10% uptake, 100 children) 0 0 67 0 100 0 2 - £15 per hour (assuming 10% uptake, 100 children) 0 0 40 0 60 0 3 - £5 per hour (assuming 10% uptake, 100 children) 0 0 13 0 20 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1162
Page 15
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: 2627EDU09 Saving Title Closure of out of school care at St Eunan’s and Linnvale Primaries Summary of Savings Proposal Currently out of school care (OSC) services are provided at St Eunan’s Primary School and Linnvale Primary School. In 2025/26 approximately 71 places across each week are being purchased by families at £17.57 per session. Based on these numbers, it is anticipated the income generated in 2025/26 will be approximately £47,404, while staffing costs for the same period are estimated to be £75,500. This means the Council will have to subsidise the cost of the service by £28,400. The council does not have a statutory duty to provide out of school care. Under this proposal, three options are being considered: Option 1 – Retain out of school care provision with an increased session cost of £22.50. Based on the attendance levels for session 2025/26 and the expected increase to staffing costs for session 2026/27 this could reduce the subsidy cost to Council to approximately £25,000. Option 2 – Retain out of school care provision, with an increased session cost to ensure breakeven, based on current utilisation. To break even, the cost per session would require to increase to £28.10 in 2026/27. Option 3 – Close out of school care provision at both Linnvale and St Eunan’s. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: There is no statutory duty to provide OSC. An increase to charges per session may make the cost prohibitive for some families and lead to a reduction in uptake, which would decrease utilisation of the service. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: If the provision at both primary schools closes, then two Senior Early Learning and Childcare Officers and three Early Learning and Childcare Officers ( amounting to 2FTE) could be displaced. Reputational Risk: Working families at St Eunan’s and Linnvale Primaries rely on this provision to support them to work. An increase in cost for the provision could make it prohibitive for them and impact on their employment. Saving (Cumulative)
Page 16
Option 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 14 0 14 0 14 0 2 29 0 29 0 29 0 3 29 2 29 2 29 2 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1347
Page 17
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: 2627 EDU11 Saving Title Mainstream School Transport Summary of Savings Proposal The Council currently provides transport to schools for: ● Primary pupils who live more than 1 mile away from school ● Secondary pupils who live more than 2 miles away from school. This exceeds the statutory requirement to provide transport to all pupils up to the age of 8 who live more than 2 miles from school, and all pupils over the age of 8 who live more than 3 miles from school. This proposal presents two options to reduce our expenditure on mainstream school transport. A statutory consultation would need to take place before implementing either of these options. Option 1 Maintain a provision of transport to schools for: ● Primary pupils who live more than 2 miles away from school ● Secondary pupils who live more than 3 miles away from school. Option 2 Bring our transport provision in line with the statutory requirement to transport for: • All pupils up to the age of 8 who live more than 2 miles from school • All pupils over the age of 8 who live more than 3 miles from school. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: Reducing the provision by either options could have an adverse impact on school attendance, particularly in inclement weather, and may lead to an increase in road traffic at the start and end of the school day, as parents opt to drive children. Undertaking a statutory consultation would be additional work for a small team, which will have a direct impact on other work. Strategic Risk: SR 002 ‘Challenges in implementing broad-ranging school improvement to raise attainment and achievement’ will be directly affected by this savings option. People Risk: There are no direct FTE or people risks with this proposal, however there are indirect people risks to local transport providers who would see a reduction in business. Reputational Risk: A statutory consultation brings risks of reputational damage to the council. When option A was previously proposed, this gathered significant local attention and negative publicity.
Page 18
Saving (Cumulative) Costs would still be incurred for routes that were not deemed as ‘safe routes’. 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 Option £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 0 0 67 0 100 0 2 0 0 80 0 120 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: EIA No: 1156
Page 19
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: 2627 EDU12 Saving Title Reduction in staff: Instrumental Music Service Summary of Savings Proposal The Instrumental Music Service supports attainment, achievement, and positively impacts school and community life. It supports young people working to gain SQA awards in music performance and also provides performance opportunities for our children and young people playing at events throughout the west of Scotland. The Council employs 10.6 instrumental music tutors who provide 336 hours per week of one-to-one and group learning to 1,014 children and young people. In 2020/21, the Scottish Government abolished all charges for instrumental music education to ensure all children, irrespective of background, have access to music education. While the Scottish Government provide some funding to support the abolishment of charges it does not cover the full-service cost as set out below Service Cost: £669k Scottish Government Funding: £205k Cost to West Dunbartonshire Council: £464k Under this option, a reduction in staffing in the service is proposed, generating a saving of £30,000. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: A reduction in staffing would reduce the number of young people gaining SQA music practical qualifications. In addition, the quality of Education service could reduce as less young people experience the benefits of music education. Strategic Risk Register:SR002 Implementing broad ranging school improvement People Risk: This saving is to be achieved by termination of a fixed-term contract. Reputational RiskA reduced service could result in an unfair advantage for families who can afford private music tuition and disadvantage our most deprived pupils. There is national agreement that all children and young people should have access to instrumental music tuition, regardless of their financial circumstances. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 23 0.4 23 0.4 23 0.4 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0.4 Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1161
Page 20
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: 2627 EDU13 Saving Title Secondary School Common Senior Phase Timetable Summary of Savings Proposal There are currently three different curriculum models running across five secondary schools. This proposal would introduce a common model across all five schools, aligning the offer to young people and establishing a minimum class size of 12 for any course. Where schools are unable to meet the minimum class size, pupils could attend another school to study the course. A common timetable would result in requiring fewer teachers to deliver it, as class sizes would be optimised. Not taking the full saving could result in increasing the offer of courses, providing a wider variety of options for our young people. Due to the timescale to develop a model for a common timetable and consult on the proposal, implementation would not be until school session 2027/28 where a part year saving would be realised. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: This will impact WDC’s ability to retain teacher numbers at 2023 levels as expected by Scottish Government. Reducing the number of teachers employed in our secondary schools will have a direct impact on the breadth of courses offered in each establishment. Having to travel to another school could be a barrier for some young people choosing a subject and would introduce a cost to the council for transportation. This could directly impact attainment and positive destinations. However it is worth noting that this approach has been successful for many years in a number of our neighbouring authorities. Strategic Risk: SR 002 ‘Challenges in implementing broad-ranging school improvement to raise attainment and achievement’ will be directly affected by this savings option, as young people may elect to stay in school and study a subject other than their first choice, rather than journey to another school. People Risk: WDC is tasked by Scottish Government to maintain teacher numbers. This would have a direct impact on 5 FTE. Reputational Risk: It is likely this change could receive a negative response from parents/carers/staff due to perceived benefits of their existing model. Teachers may object to optimisation of class sizes due to increased pressure. Any reduction in teacher numbers carries reputational risk, as we are tasked by Scottish Government to maintain teacher numbers at 2023 levels. Saving (Cumulative)
Page 21
2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 0 0 236 5 354 5 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1159
Page 22
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: 2627 EDU14 Saving Title Secondary School Staffing Summary of Savings Proposal Staffing in schools is determined by school roll, but it is not reduced to account for the number of young people being educated elsewhere. There are approximately 600 young people attending college or partner providers for part of their school week (either 2 afternoons per week, or 4 afternoons per week for college). This proposal would seek to reduce staffing to account for this, and based on current rolls with college and other partner providers, this would equate to 7.8 FTE, spread across 5 secondary schools. Due to the timescales to develop and implement course offers in our schools and with partners, the earliest a saving could be realised would be for session 2027/28, which would be a part year saving. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: This will impact WDC’s ability to retain teacher numbers at 2023 levels as expected by Scottish Government. Reducing the number of teachers employed in our secondary schools will have a direct impact on the breadth of courses offered. The number of young people attending partner providers fluctuates each year. If there were fewer young people attending partner providers, we would require the staffing to be in our schools to teach the young people. Fewer young people studying courses with partners would directly impact attainment and positive destinations. Strategic Risk: SR 002 ‘Challenges in implementing broad-ranging school improvement to raise attainment and achievement’ will be directly affected by this savings option. People Risk: WDC is tasked by Scottish Government to maintain teacher numbers. This would have a direct impact on 7.8 FTE. Reputational Risk: This is likely to generate a negative response from parents/carers/staff as it could lead to a reduction in provision of courses in the Senior Phase on offer in each school. Any reduction in teacher numbers carries reputational risk, as we are tasked by Scottish Government to maintain teacher numbers at 2023 levels. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29
Page 23
£000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 0 0 368 7.8 552 7.8 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1160
Page 24
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: 2627 EDU15 Saving Title Senior Phase Transport Summary of Savings Proposal Presently, we transport around 600 Senior Phase pupils per week to attend classes in other schools and colleges. The majority of these are by bus to West College Scotland in Clydebank, but a number are via taxi to neighbouring schools or other colleges in the Glasgow/Paisley area. Young people also attend college in Glasgow via Scotrail. Transport is provided to ensure that the young person arrives at the venue in time for class. This proposal presents four options to reduce our expenditure on Senior Phase transport by reducing our operating costs. Option 1 – £67k Saving Move Senior Phase transport that presently uses taxis to Internal Transport provision following the additional minibus/driver capacity introduced in 2025. Option 2 – £37k Saving Remove all return journeys, requiring all young people to travel home via public transport. Option 3 – £22k Saving Remove consortium return journeys only, meaning young people attending another school would travel home via public transport. Option 4 – £15k Saving Remove West College Scotland Clydebank return journeys only, meaning young people attending West College Scotland Clydebank Campus would travel home via public transport. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service risk: Option 1 does not present a service risk. Options 2-4, where young people would have to make their own way home may have an impact on uptake of college and consortium courses. This could have an indirect impact on attainment and positive destinations of our young people. Strategic Risk: N/A for Option 1. For Options 2-4, SR 002 ‘Challenges in implementing broad-ranging school improvement to raise attainment and achievement’ will be indirectly affected. People Risk: N/A Reputational Risk: There is a reputational risk associated with removing business from local taxi providers. In addition, local bus capacity or provision may not align
Page 25
with the volume of young people looking to make use of it which may present a challenge for First Glasgow and other local bus operators. A small number of young people may require transport at the end of the day in order to get to part time employment on time. Some courses/locations would still receive transport both ways due to complex routes between them and West Dunbartonshire, and removing transport from some could be seen as inequitable. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 Option £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 44 0 67 0 67 0 2 24 0 37 0 37 0 3 14 0 22 0 22 0 4 10 0 15 0 15 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1429
Page 26
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: 2627 EDU17 Saving Title Reduce Day and Residential School Budget Summary of Savings Proposal The Council operates under a presumption to mainstream model, with our ambition to divert more support locally to keep children and young people educated in their communities and with their families. This approach, which supports our inclusive practices, will be extended over the next three years. In line with this approach, the Council has invested in 91 addition specialist setting places and four enhanced mainstream support settings across the school estate, providing 115 additional places. The Council has supported an average of 69 children or young people in day placements and 30 in residential each year for the past three years. The budget for these out of authority placements is £5,684,000. This option proposes a reduction in the budget currently allocated for out of authority day and residential placements, incrementally over three years. This is equivalent to an average reduction of five day places or three residential places. No children currently placed with partner providers outwith West Dunbartonshire will be impacted by this proposal. This will result in decreased payments to out of authority partners. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: There will be an increased number of children and young people with complex needs requiring ‘in-house’ support. This option will mean additional demands on Central Support Resources including Educational Psychologists, Children’s Services Officers and schools. Schools which are already challenged in meeting the range of needs across the service will be subject to increased expectations and demand, risking staff grievance. This could lead to an increased risk of Additional Support Needs Tribunals for Scotland (ASNTS) which has significant resource implications across the service. The risks should be considered in conjunction with other savings proposals. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: N/A Reputational Risk: There is a risk that this is challenged by parents and carers, children and young people or their advocates, who disagree the support offered is
Page 27
appropriate. This could lead to increased risk of the Council being referred to the Additional Support Needs Tribunals for Scotland (ASNTS). Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 150 0 200 0 200 0 Equality Impact Assessment Completed: EIA No: 1433
Page 28
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: 2627 EDU19 Saving Title Reduction in Management Funding for ELC provision Summary of Savings Proposal Currently all primary school settings with an early learning and childcare (ELC) provision are allocated specific funding to support them to fund 0.2FTE supply teacher cover. This enables a Senior Leader to undertake management aspects of the facility. Six settings which are provided with this management funding also have a full time Principal Teacher for Early Years in place, whose remit is to oversee and support the management of the ELC provision. In those settings, a total of 1.2FTE of support (1FTE Principal Teacher and 0.2FTE supply teacher cover) is available. Under this proposal settings which have an allocated Principal Teacher for Early Years would no longer receive the additional management funding to purchase supply cover, making a saving of £68,916. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: There is a risk that Principal Teacher management time could be reduced if they are required to provide cover for other staff. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: N/A Reputational Risk: A reduction in this funding could impact on the quality of the provision. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 46 0 69 0 69 0 Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No:1383
Page 29
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamilton Saving Ref: 2627 EDU20 Saving Title Reduction in Temporary Teaching Posts Summary of Savings Proposal Each year, in order to cover a wide variety of circumstances, we deploy within our available budget a number of temporary teaching posts to alleviate pressure points within the system. This also ensures we meet conditions placed upon us by Scottish Government. Our pupil roll is declining in West Dunbartonshire and it is proposed the temporary teaching posts are reduced by five to reflect this. This would make our numbers align more closely with our pupil/teacher ratio. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: This will impact the Council’s ability to retain teacher numbers at 2023 levels as expected by Scottish Government. Reducing the number of teachers employed in our primary schools will reduce flexibility to staff according to identified pressure points or need. Reducing the number of teachers employed in our secondary schools will have a direct impact on the breadth of courses offered. Strategic Risk: SR 002 ‘Challenges in implementing broad-ranging school improvement to raise attainment and achievement’ will be directly affected by this savings option. People Risk: The Council is tasked by Scottish Government to maintain teacher numbers. This would have a direct impact on 5 FTE, potentially leaving us open to challenge and withholding of funding. Reputational Risk: It is likely this option will receive a negative response from parents/carers/staff as there may be an increased workload for remaining teachers, and a potential reduction in provision of Senior Phase courses on offer in each school. Any reduction in teacher numbers carries reputational risk, as we are tasked by the Scottish Government to maintain teacher numbers at 2023 levels. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 228 5 345 5 345 5 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1430
Page 30
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gillian Hamiton Saving Ref: 2627 EDU23 Saving Title Roll related Clerical Hour Allocation Summary of Savings Proposal Given school rolls have declined in many schools, an audit of clerical hours compared with pupil rolls is proposed to ensure provision properly reflects need. The aim of the audit is to identify locations where clerical allocation can be reduced or requires to be increased. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: A review of clerical functions in primary and secondary schools undertaken between 2023-2025 has already delivered reductions and a further reduction in front line staff will impact on quality of service to children, parents and families as limited scope for fast paced people centred response. Strategic Risk: N/A People Risk: It is anticipated that staffing reductions will impact on individual staff being asked to change work location. Concern that further reduction will impact on headteachers to provide services out with remit and role (reception duties and admin, care and welfare of children, families and members of local community). This is a compound reduction at a time when learning assistant provision being reduced which often provided flexibility for front line service response (reception duties / care and welfare of children) Reputational Risk : There is a potential for negative perception by trade unions and also parents/carers who may not receive support at school reception as quickly as they currently do. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 60 2 90 3 90 3 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1450
Page 31
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer Peter Barry Saving Ref: 2627 HE01 Saving Title Cease Rotation of Temporary Accommodation Summary of Savings Proposal The Council currently provides basic furnishings to approximately 250 temporary accommodation units, with a budget of £1,000 per home. The service rotates temporary accommodation, with the aim of ensuring that by 2027/28, no home is used for that purpose for a period greater than three years. As part of this, plans were made to relocate 10 temporary accommodation homes in 2026/27. Under this option, the rotation work would cease, reducing planned expenditure by an estimated £10k in 2026/27 and future years if planned activity in future years is also ceased. Operational reasons may require some units to be retired during the course of 2026/27; however, this would be treated as a cost pressure within the wider homelessness budget. Is there a capital requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: This proposal is contrary to a service commitment made to the Council in terms of the rotation of the units, however that service commitment was made in advance of the budget pressures faced by the Council today. As a similar saving option was accepted in 2025/26, with 17 planned retirals ceased, this will potentially result in 27 properties being used as temporary accommodation above the planned 5-year period. People Risk: N/A Strategic Risk Register: The proposed saving option does not impact on any of the Council’s identified strategic risks. Reputational Risk: The proposal may be viewed negatively by neighbouring tenants and residents through the continued use of a nearby home as temporary accommodation. This will be mitigated by ongoing excellent management of temporary accommodation with concerns resolved timeously. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 10 0 10 0 10 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1307
Page 32
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Peter Barry Saving Ref: 2627 HE02 Saving Title Reduce CCTV Team Summary of Savings Proposal The CCTV service provides monitoring and surveillance to prevent and detect anti- social and criminal behaviour, promoting safety and wellbeing within communities as well as supporting decriminalised parking enforcement by identifying areas with increased illegal parking. There are four operatives in this team with three employees on Grade 3 and one supervisor employee on Grade 5. The team require a minimum of four CCTV operatives to allow efficient operation of the rota seven days per week 8am-4am to provide live monitoring provision to proactively prevent crime and anti-social behaviour in our communities. Our CCTV network has recently been upgraded following successful funding application capital investment of £680k of UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF), matched by £750k from Housing Revenue Account (HRA). This led to the installation of 407 new CCTV cameras across West Dunbartonshire. From January 2025 to January 2026 there were 1863 incident logs recorded including large scale disturbances, violence/assaults, theft, support for vulnerable persons, anti-social behaviour, domestic abuse, drugs, vandalism, fires, road traffic and public nuisance. Incidents recorded do not take account of the proactive monitoring of cameras to detect and support prevention of anti-social behaviour or criminal activity to safeguard our communities. Under this proposal there are two options: Option 1 – Delete one CCTV Operative Option 2 – Delete two CCTV Operatives. Both options will have significant impact on the Council’s ability to identify and prevent acts of anti-social behaviour and criminal activity, along with reduced opportunity to proactively target areas for decriminalised parking enforcement and Penalty Charge Notices. Is there a Capital Requirement? There is no new capital requirement. A 5-year contract in place with BT for the ongoing maintenance of the new modernised CCTV network, which equates to £134,000 per year. These costs would continue regardless of whether there is live CCTV monitoring or not. Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: The CCTV team supports decriminalised parking enforcement. Any reduction to the team may impact upon the Council’s ability to generate income in this way. There is a risk of increased crime or anti-social behaviour due to reduced ability to prevent and detect crime in communities. Also reduced capacity to provide
Page 33
evidence for court proceedings. There is an increased risk of missed opportunity to detect and prevent anti-social behaviour/criminal incidents as CCTV monitoring supports the Council’s Anti-Social Behaviour Team and Police Scotland. Both options would result in increased periods of no live monitoring due to lack of resilience within team during planned or unplanned staff leave. Strategic Risk Register: No potential impact on areas of Strategic Risk. People Risk: Loss of between 1-2 FTE. Reputational Risk: Given the level of capital investment from UK Government and HRA, a reduction in CCTV operation poses a reputational risk as any periods of unmanned CCTV increases the risk of missing real time opportunity to prevent and capture anti-social behaviour or criminal activities. Residents may react negatively to a perceived loss of safety. In addition, the Council may be criticised if illegal parking is not identified quickly. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 25% - Option 1 14 1 27 1 27 1 50% - Option 2 27 2 54 2 54 2 It should be noted that any savings are only partial as the posts are part funded by HRA. The 2026/27 savings would be for half year to take account of required staffing/TU consultation periods if any options taken. FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1351
Page 34
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Victoria Rogers Saving Ref: 2627 PT01 Saving Title Review leadership support and explore transfer to CAS Summary of Savings Proposal The Leadership Support Team provides administrative and personal assistant support to the Chief Executive and Chief Officers of the Council. There are synergies between the work of the Leadership Support Supervisor and that of Corporate Administrative Support Team Leaders. Additionally, the introduction of AI-enabled transcribing of meetings and other digital solutions is likely to reduce demand in Leadership Support Team, enabling the streamlining of work. It is proposed that the team transfers to be managed by Corporate Administrative Support, reducing the number of Supervisor/Team Leader posts required. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: There is a risk capacity within Corporate Administrative Support cannot absorb work of managing additional employees meaning quality of service delivered to Chief Officers and Chief Executive may be impacted. To mitigate this, a review of tasks will be undertaken to identify where digital solutions may reduce demand on team such as transcribing of meetings through M365. Strategic Risk Register: There would be no impact on strategic risks. People Risk: Deletion of Supervisor or Team Leader post would create a redundancy if redeployment could not be achieved. Deleting a post at Supervisor level would reduce the impact on lower grade employees and help the manage any impact on service delivered to Chief Officers and Chief Executive. Reputational Risk: The risk is assessed as low. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 0 0 49 1 49 1 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: Could potentially avoid compulsory redundancy through use of planned age retirement. Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1444
Page 35
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Victoria Rogers Saving Ref: 2627 PT10 Saving Title Charges for Disclosure Scotland Summary of Savings Proposal Updates to the Disclosure Scotland Act 2020 last year is resulting in increased charges for PVG applications A PVG membership is now required for al regulated roles meaning an increase to the number of posts now caught by this requirement. In addition, a new 2025 fee and category structure has been introduced. New Categories & Costs: 1. Level 1 Disclosure - £25: Aimed at individuals applying for jobs where a basic criminal record check is required. 2. Level 2 Disclosure - £25: For roles that require a more detailed background check, including specific checks for roles such as solicitors and financial responsibility. 3. Level 2 with Barred List Check - £25: For specific activities such as adoption. 4. PVG Scheme Membership - £59: Remains the membership scheme for roles working with children or protected adults. It is a legal requirement to join the scheme for individuals undertaking a regulated role. With PVG scheme existing membership this is £18. There are also general administrative fees such as Registration Fee for accredited bodies (£125) and counter-signatory fees. The average annual cost of PVG applications over the last three years is around £29,000 albeit this is based on previous years’ before the increase to regulated roles. Under this proposal, two options are presented for consideration. The first option proposes passing the costs to all applicants/employees, whilst the second proposes passing the costs only to those above Grade 5 and equivalent Teacher (SNCT) grades. All options have been modelled on the outturn for 2023/24 noting that average annual costs are £29,000 over the last 3 years (against a budget of £30,000). Option 1 – saving £26k per annum: Charges for PVG membership would be the responsibility of applicants. Option 2 – saving of £16k per annum: Charges for PVG Membership for roles above Grade 5 would be responsibility of applicants. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: It could make it harder for services to recruit into roles, some of which are already hard to fill. Prospective employees may opt not to consider a position if they are required to pay the Disclosure Scotland charges. This is specifically true for areas where these proposals impact lower grade roles (option 1). It is worthy of note that many local authorities already pass these costs onto the applicants or pay the cost and recover through pay over a specified period. Should members decide
Page 36
not to pass the cost to employees, consideration must be given to budget strain as increasing numbers of regulated roles are identified across the organisation. Strategic Risk: There would be an impact on SR007, complexities in ensuring an appropriately resourced and resilient workforce People Risk: Due consideration of this cost saving option should be given to the employment groups affected by this proposal which may impact ability to fill roles, mainly educational establishments. This may deter entrants to lower paid children’s services roles (although this could be mitigated through phased recovery); and cause a reduction in volunteering opportunities and the number of volunteers, as the council currently pays for PVG membership. Reputational Risk: Passing the costs to individuals may have an adverse impact on the Council’s reputation. Saving 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 Option £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 26 0 26 0 26 0 2 16 0 16 0 16 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1392
Page 37
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Victoria Rogers Saving Ref: PT11 Saving Title Reduction in Corporate Training Budget Summary of Savings Proposal The Council's corporate training budget is £55,000. It funds workforce development activities such as i-learn modules, leadership programmes (Modern Leaders, Inspiring Leaders), and digital tools. In addition, it supports specific needs including retraining displaced employees and service-driven requests identified through workforce planning. Under this option, the corporate training budget would reduce by £15,000 to £40,000 which would reduce the level of support available. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: Support available to displaced employees would reduce as would support to meet specific learning needs which may impact on service delivery. In particular this would impact on ICT and Digital as they need to upskill ahead of the wider workforce to ensure best use of new tools available. There will be less budget to support the redeployment of displaced employees through the SWITCH Policy which may lead to increased costs in relation to unavoidable/statutory redundancy and/or access to unreduced pension benefits. Strategic Risk Register: There would be an impact on SR007 Complexities in ensuring an appropriately resourced and resilient workforce. People Risk: There is no direct impact on FTE but indirectly, opportunities for redeployment may be reduced. Reputational Risk: Provision of a training budget is not statutory however there are service delivery roles within the Council that employees have been successfully redeployed into that require Scottish Vocational Qualifications. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 15 0 15 0 15 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1369
Page 38
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Laurence Slavin Saving Ref: 2627 RES01 Saving Title Review of External Funding Summary of Savings Proposal The Council’s general fund provides funding to a range of external groups/organisations to help pay for a range of services/activity. There is scope to either fully remove or reduce this funding in 2026/27 or on a phased basis over a number of years. The table below sets out the groups currently in receipt of funding and a summary of what the funding is provided for. Group Reason for Funding 2025/26 (£) West Dunbartonshire Community & Volunteering Services Voluntary Grant funding for social transport (£50k), play schemes and running costs (£25k). 75,000 YSortIt Engage with young people including the provision of issue based workshops, personal development, group work, support to achieve accreditation, and assist the development of healthy lifestyles and facilitate participation in community projects. 87,820 YSortIt Education Specific - Care connections and community mentoring supports for children and young people who are care experienced. Supports out of school learning and mentoring 76,000 Antonine Sports Centre Provide access to sports and community facilities in Duntocher 74,516 Clyde Shopmobility Deliver a mobility scooter, manual and powered wheelchair service to residents from its base in Clydebank Shopping Centre 47,760 Clydebank Asbestos Group Support running costs related to the provision of support, advice and information for victims of asbestos and their families 21,560 Lomond and Clyde Care & Repair Support to private homeowners to help them apply for grant funding via the Council for medical adaptations or essential repairs. 41,000 WD Citizen’s Advice Bureau Support for debt and benefit advice and consumer rights. 221,583 Total 645,239 Note that the funding detailed above excludes any funding made available on a time restricted basis from the Cost-of-Living fund and groups funded by the Dumbarton Common Good.
Page 39
Some indicative options for consideration are set out in the table below however other options can also be considered. Note the indicative options assume all groups are considered for reductions and treated equally. It would also be possible to apply different percentage savings to groups on an individual basis. Under this proposal, there are three options: Option 1: Fully remove all funding in 2026/27 Option 2: Phase out funding over two years Option 3: Phase out funding over three years Is there a Capital Requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: N/A People Risk: N/A Strategic Risk Register: N/A Reputational Risk: There would be a reputational risk to the Council as reduction in funding to any of these groups would have a detrimental impact on the support service they provide to communities across West Dunbartonshire. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 – Remove in Year 1 645 0 645 0 645 0 2 – Phase 2 Years 323 0 645 0 645 0 3 – Phase 3 years 215 0 430 0 645 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1411, 1412, 1413, 1414, 1415, 1416, 1417, 1419
Page 40
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Laurence Slavin Saving Ref: 2627 RES04 Saving Title Review of Office Accommodation Summary of Savings Proposal This proposal is to review office accommodation across three locations, Aurora House Carleith Primary School Campus, and Clydebank Library. Aurora has 73 desks on the ground and first floor allocated to Health & Social Care Partnership and Citizen, Culture and Facilities (CCF) staff. This property is leased to the Council from Clydebank Property Company. Clydebank Library has under utilised space on the 1st floor and plans have previously been drafted for a potential relocation of CCF staff. Carleith Primary School Campus has an area of office accommodation primarily used by psychological services, early years and education management team. The review will consider the allocation of staff across these sites to determine whether there is a more cost effective allocation model which still enables services to be delivered with the Council making a saving on the lease cost of Aurora House. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: Low - Minimal impact on service delivery across the locations as services are remaining in the geographical area. People Risk: Moderate - Relocations will impact multiple staff groups, potentially altering work locations, travel requirements, and access to team facilities. There is a risk of reduced morale or resistance to change, particularly if staff perceive new arrangements as less convenient or if workspace capacity is limited. Strategic Risk Register: Low - This proposal links to the Strategic Risk Register, given alignment with the Council’s wider Workforce and Accommodation Strategy and contribution to long-term financial sustainability through asset rationalisation. Reputational Risk: Low - Reputational impact is expected to be low if relocations are well-managed and service continuity maintained. However, any perceived reduction in workspace quality, accessibility, or employee welfare could draw internal criticism. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 25 0 50 0 50 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1408
Page 41
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Laurence Slavin Saving Ref: 2627 RES14 Saving Title Elderly Welfare Grant Summary of Savings Proposal The Council currently offers a £15 per year Elderly Welfare Grant to all West Dunbartonshire residents over the age of 67. The budget for this grant is £110,000. Individuals have the option to have the grant paid to themselves or allocated to a group they are involved with for use for a social event. Last year £61,485 was paid to individuals and groups. Administration of this fund involves manual intervention for a range of services. Officers must verify applications, pay £15 to each applicant, and manage discrepancies including failed bank transfers. The Council relies on individuals to update personal records. When information is not kept up to date it can lead to a significant additional workload. In addition to the £110,000 saving, a further £10,000 could be saved from year two on costs associated with issuing remittance advice to each individual. This £10,000 saving would not be realised in year one as the Council would require notifying in writing those currently in receipt of the grant that it is no longer available. There are two options for this proposal. Option 1 – Cease payment of these grants with a percentage of the saving redirected to an external body to support charities who focus on supporting the elderly. For the purposes of this template a 50% redirection has been costed however there would be flexibility to consider a different percentage. Option 2 – Cease payment of these grants with none of the saving redirected. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: N/A People Risk: N/A Strategic Risk Register: N/A Reputational Risk: General risk of criticism for removing grants to elderly citizens. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 Option £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 55 0 60 0 60 0 2 110 0 120 0 120 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1418 2026/27 SAVING OPTION
Page 42
Chief Officer: Laurence Slavin Saving Ref: 2627 RES15 Saving Title Review of Community Council Funding Summary of Savings Proposal The Council’s general fund provides £14,000 of funding to Community Councils as a flat rate £750 administration grant plus a per capita allowance. The Council is required by statute to support community councils. In the past the Council has reduced officer support provided to them and part of the justification was the provision of the grant to pay for admin support/necessary ICT etc. This proposal has four options as follows: Option 1: Reduce funding to Community Councils by 25% Option 2: Reduce funding to Community Councils by 50% Option 3: Reduce funding to Community Councils by 75% Option 4: Remove funding to Community Councils (this option would require to be considered at a special meeting of the Council with a two thirds majority vote). Is there a Capital Requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: If the grant is fully removed it will increase pressure for greater officer support which is likely to cost more than the saving made. People Risk: N/A Strategic Risk Register: N/A Reputational Risk: There is a reputational risk as an expectation exists that local authorities will support community councils financially. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 Option £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 3.5 0 3.5 0 3.5 0 2 7 0 7 0 7 0 3 10.5 0 10.5 0 10.5 0 4 14 0 14 0 14 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1202 2026/27 SAVING OPTION
Page 43
Chief Officer: Laurence Slavin Saving Ref: 2627 RES18 Saving Title National Fraud Initiative Single Person Discount Review Summary of Savings Proposal People living on their own can be eligible for a 25% single person discount (SPD) on their annual council tax bill. The National Fraud Initiative (NFI) matches SPD recipients to the electoral register and other datasets to identify where other adult residents have not been declared on applications, have subsequently turned 18 or have moved in. The information provided to the Council by the NFI must be fully investigated to ensure there is no acceptable reason for the mismatch. If no reason is identified, contact is made with the taxpayer in receipt of the SPD to discuss the matter. If appropriate, amended council tax notices are issued for payment with non-payment resulting in the normal recovery processes to be followed. This results in additional council tax income of an estimated £50k per year, however also generates significant additional work. It is therefore proposed an additional Grade 3 post is recruited to complete the NFI SPD Review for council tax. It is estimated this would generate net income for the Council of £20,000 per annum. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: The review will be delivered using an additional staff member so it is not expected to reduce any existing service functions. However, as it adds investigative and recovery workload, there is a modest risk other reactive tasks may be slightly delayed during periods of peak demand. People Risk: N/A Strategic Risk Register: N/A Reputational Risk: While the review aims to ensure fairness and accuracy in the award of discounts, some residents may perceive the removal of the SPD as punitive or dispute the findings. To mitigate this, all decisions will be supported by robust evidence and clear communication. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 16 0 20 0 20 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1396 2026/27 SAVING OPTION
Page 44
Chief Officer: Laurence Slavin Saving Ref: 2627 RES19 Saving Title Review use of Municipal Building Summary of Savings Proposal The Council’s Municipal Building is open five days per week between the hours of 8am and 6pm, with weekend access provided as required for wedding ceremonies. It is proposed to review the current and future use of the Municipal Building as part of the wider office accommodation and asset rationalisation programme. This will assess occupancy levels, service delivery requirements, and operational costs, and identify the most efficient and sustainable way to utilise the property. The review will explore the potential for lease of the building, supported by a detailed marketing exercise to attract potential parties. Active marketing of the building for shared or partnership use with any appropriate bodies will be undertaken. The review will balance operational needs, heritage considerations, and financial implications, with a target to identify measurable efficiencies and/or income generation opportunities. Outcomes from this review will be presented once feasibility work and engagement with potential parties are complete. As part of the review, the Council will undertake targeted market testing to gauge external interest in the building. Any progression toward alternative use would only be pursued where genuine, demonstrable interest is identified, ensuring that decisions are evidence-based and aligned with best value principles. The year one saving has been reduced to allow time for the property to be actively marketed for lease. The Council will continue to lease the building from the Common Good until such time as an alternative tenant can be identified. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: The review may lead to changes in how the Municipal Building is used or accessed, including potential reduction in opening days, relocation of existing functions, or full disposal. Any such change could temporarily affect public access, service availability, and event scheduling. People Risk: Staff based within the Municipal Building could be affected depending on the outcome of the review. Strategic Risk Register: Moderate - This proposal should be linked to the Strategic Risk Register, as it forms part of the Council’s wider asset rationalisation and financial sustainability programme. Reputational Risk: Reputational impact is expected to be low if relocations are well- managed and service continuity is maintained. Saving (Cumulative)
Page 45
2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 16 0 65 0 65 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1409
Page 46
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Laurence Slavin Saving Ref: 2627 RES20 Saving Title Review use of depot rental charges Summary of Savings Proposal Internal recharges for several depot facilities have remained static for a number of years, despite changes in occupancy levels, service delivery models, and associated property costs such as maintenance, utilities, and insurance. In addition, a number of strategic sites in the Clydebank area, used by various services for storage, fleet operations, and support functions have never previously been subject to internal rental or recharge, resulting in under recovery of property costs within the asset management budget. To ensure rental charges accurately reflect current market values, usage patterns, and operational cost recovery principles, a detailed review of internal property recharges and rental arrangements for depot sites and strategic operational locations across the Council’s asset portfolio has been undertaken. This exercise has identified revised and new rental charges for a range of locations. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: Introduction of revised and new internal recharges will not directly reduce service delivery but may create budgetary pressures for individual services as costs are realigned to reflect fair market value. People Risk: There is a potential for indirect impact if services subsequently review depot-based operations or staffing structures as part of their efficiency planning. Strategic Risk Register: Low to Moderate - This proposal supports the Council’s broader Asset Rationalisation and Financial Sustainability objectives by ensuring all operational property costs are accurately attributed and recovered. Reputational Risk: Reputational risk is minimal, however, if service impacts or depot rationalisations occur in later phases, there is potential for perceived internal inequity or challenge from affected departments. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 75 0 75 0 75 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1410
Page 47
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Laurence Slavin Saving Ref: 2627 RES21 Saving Title Council Tax on Long Term Empty and Second Homes Summary of Savings Proposal As per the terms of Local Government Finance (Unoccupied Properties, etc.) (Scotland) Act 2012 and Council Tax (Variation for Unoccupied Dwellings) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2023, owners of long-term empty homes and second homes in West Dunbartonshire currently pay 200% Council Tax rate. This generates generated additional Council Tax (CT) income of approximately £300,000 per year. The aim of the increased charge for empty homes and holidays homes is to incentivise owners to bring their homes back into use or return them to a main residence. This has reduced the number of empty homes in the area by more than half over the past 11 years, while holiday homes have reduced marginally. In 2024/25, the total collection rate on the increased charges was 75.6% including all debt recovered via Corporate Debt and/or the Council’s Debt Partners. The Council Tax (Variation for Unoccupied Dwellings) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2026 removed the upper limit on Council Tax rates for these homes, which creates an opportunity to introduce a further increase. There are five options to be considered with the associated saving based on a 75% collection rate Option 1: Increase the charge from 200% to 225% - increased CT of £56,250 Option 2: Increase the charge from 200% to 250% - increased CT of £112,500 Option 3: Increase the charge from 200% to 275% - increased CT of £168,750 Option 4: Increase the charge from 200% to 300% - increased CT of £225,000 There is scope to introduced increased charges from the start of 2026/27, mid-year in 2026/27 or from the start of 2027/28. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Impact and Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: There is a risk that the potential increase in Council Tax income will be less than stated however this will be a result of second home becoming someone’s sole or main residence which will bring benefits to the communities or long-term empty properties being brought back into use. People Risk: N/A Strategic Risk Register: N/A
Page 48
Reputational Risk: Any change may lead to complaints from taxpayers who feel the further increase to be unfair given they already pay double the Council Tax charge than others in the same Council Tax band who are in receipt of the same level of services from the Council. The increase could also lead to the owners’ financial hardship therefore impacting their ability to bring an empty property back into use. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 – Increase to 225% 56 0 56 0 56 0 2 – Increase to 250% 113 0 113 0 113 0 3 – Increase to 275% 169 0 169 0 169 0 4 - Increase to 300% 225 0 225 0 225 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1426
Page 49
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gail Macfarlane Saving Ref: 2627 RN01 Saving Title Closure of Bowling Clubs Summary of Savings Proposal The Council currently maintain the buildings and grounds of six bowling clubs at Whitecrook, Goldenhill, Christie Park Veterans, Bonhill Veterans, Balloch Veterans and Renton Veterans. Membership across the six sites remains low. In 2024/25, the utility bill cost for all sites – which includes electricity, gas and water– was circa £33,000. At Whitecrook and Goldenhill (before its closure due to significant vandalism last year) members receive the concessionary rate of £28.45 per season generating a total income of £1,384 per year. This is significantly less than the £44,000 the Council pays for buildings and ground maintenance across both sites. The veteran club members do not pay membership fees but receive maintenance of buildings and grounds. Currently grass cutting costs £24,000 per year across the six sites with additional costs for building maintenance. This option proposes to retain Whitecrook and merge the veteran bowling clubs to Christie Park. The Council has a dedicated resource to support the merger, and will continue to maintain the greens, building and associated amenities at the two retained clubs. Maintenance of the other sites would cease and these would be considered for disposal. The potential saving/income generation is estimated to be approximately £81,000. This will not be delivered from year 1 and the saving profile is set out in the table below. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: There is a service risk of continuing at all six sites, as the cost significantly outweighs income and when repairs are required (as is the situation at Goldenhill due to vandalism), there is no budget to undertake the work. Goldenhill Bowling Club is now closed and has not reopened for summer season 25/26 following vandalism and damage caused. There is no budget available to undertake necessary repair works (expected to be in the region of £48k). In addition, in 2025/26 quotes were received for £19,943 for a roof renewal at Renton Veterans Bowling Club, but there is no budget available to undertake these works. Strategic Risk Register: N/A
Page 50
People Risk: The FTE impact is employment of seasonal operative at 0.5FTE Reputational Risk: The membership of all bowling clubs are low and tend to be older members of the community. Members are likely to be critical of the Council in terms of the social aspect, and merging may introduce accessibility issues for members in relation to attending. This has been mitigated by the proposal to retain a club facility within both Dumbarton and Clydebank areas. It is anticipated that there is alternative capacity in private clubs in the Alexandria area to accommodate membership of the affected bowling clubs there. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 40 0.5 66 0.5 81 0.5 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: will be delivered through a reduction in seasonal operative and 0.5FTE operational reduction Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1398
Page 51
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gail Macfarlane Saving Ref: 2627 RN04 Saving Title Street Lighting Summary of Savings Proposal Based on current estimates the annual electricity cost of one-hour operation of street lights in 2026/27 will be £48,676. This option proposes a change to street light programming. There is an environmental benefit to reduced street lighting as there will be a reduction in light pollution and carbon footprint. This would support the council’s journey to net zero, nature recovery and encourage nocturnal wildlife. There are two options to consider: Option 1: Lights programmed to be off for two hours between the hours of 2.30am and 4.30am. Option 2: Lights programmed to be off for three hours between or between 2.30am and 5.30am. Is there a Capital Requirement? Yes. Capital investment of circa £300k is required to install timers on columns. It is anticipated the project would require a nine-month lead in to procure consultant to undertake design, facilitate procurement and installation of timers and to undertake a communications activity. The revenue implication per year including capital repayment and loan is £18,600 per annum for 25 years. Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: Whilst turning off of street lights has been implemented in other areas, this has tended to be within more rural and less built up areas. Due to the nature of our network there would be very little benefit in only implementing this in rural areas alone and the proposal would be for a blanket turning off of all lights during these hours. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: N/A Reputational Risk: There is no legal requirement on local authorities in the UK to provide street lighting, but the Council does have a duty to ensure that lighting units are kept in a safe condition. There is a perception that reduced lighting levels will lead to an increase in crime. Whilst there is little actual evidence to support this communities may feel less safe if street lights are switched off. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 Option £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE
Page 52
1 6 0 77 0 77 0 2 18 0 126 0 126 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A . Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1380
Page 53
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gail MacFarlane Saving Ref: RN05 Saving Title Working4U Service Reduction Summary of Savings Proposal The Council provides Working4U with £1.24m with an additional £4million provided through external funding. All external funding is ringfenced for specific eligible activity. This includes funding from: • Macmillan Cancer • No One Left Behind (Scottish Government) • Skills Development Scotland (National Programmes) • UK Shared Prosperity funding (UK Government) As well as managing the service and securing and managing the external funds, Working4U is responsible for facilitating partnerships and associated strategy/planning development, monitoring and reporting. This includes: • Local Employability Partnership (Three-year employability plan) • No One Left Behind/Family Prosperity Network (Local Annual Child Poverty Report) • Community Learning and Development Partnership (Three Year Community Learning and Development (CLD) Plan) • Welfare/Benefits Partnership These requirements have emerged either as a strategic policy priority; a condition of the external funding or legislative/statutory requirements and/or service quality compliance. Working4U has 77 employees (70 Full Time Equivalent (FTE)). Of these: • 28 (26 FTE) are Council funded • 49 (44 FTE) are external grant funded (primarily employability service staff). Of the Council funded posts, 14 FTE must be retained to ensure continued delivery of the work outlined above as this cannot be met by external funding. This includes the compliance requirements set out by the external funders. This means 12 FTE of the Council funded workforce can be considered under this option. This will impact activities including Welfare Support, Debt Management, Adult Learning and Employability as these cannot be delivered utilising external funding. Therefore, even if additional external funding is received, these services will still be reduced as a result of this saving. There are four options to consider: Option 1 – Reduction of 3 FTE – saving £122,500 Option 2 – Reduction of 6FTE – saving £245,000 Option 3 – Reduction of 9 FTE – saving £367,000 Option 4 – Reduction of 12 FTE – saving £490,000
Page 54
The FTE reduction may reduce. The final FTE will depend on the level of external funding received by the Council. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: Each option will reduce the number of employees available to deliver Working4U services with adult and community-based learning, welfare rights, debt advice and support to get residents into employment and apprenticeships impacted. It would also reduce the capacity to apply for ad-hoc external funding or offer support for businesses. Third sector support would cease. There is a risk that while the Council remains responsible for creating/delivering the Community Learning and Development Plan and associated partnership, and the Local Child Poverty Report and associated partnership, we have to rely wholly on external funds to provide/deliver the services. These options must be considered alongside the reduction in external funding from UKSPF, which will cease in 2026/27 with revenue funding reduced from £1.2m to £400,000 (best case scenario) as it transitions to the UK Growth Fund. There are currently 20 posts funded by UKSPF and this will mean a reduction to the workforce of approximately 12FTE. The combined impact of reductions in external funding and council reductions will require full scale consideration of the structure, priorities and service provision. People Risk: Up to 12 FTE employees impacted. There are currently no vacancies so will require a reduction of workforce. The FTE impact is indicative as should alternative external funding be secured this impact will reduce. Strategic Risk: N/A Reputational Risk: A reduction in service provision and in turn the support offered carries a significant reputational risk. The reductions will be noticeable by service users and those in crisis who will face longer waiting times for support. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 Option £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 1 61 3 122 3 122 3 2 122.5 6 245 6 245 6 3 184 9 368 9 368 9 4 245 12 490 12 490 12 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. In addition if alternative external funding is secured this will reduce FTE impact as employees will transition to new funds as eligibility allows. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1401
Page 55
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gail Macfarlane Saving Ref: 2627 RN06 Saving Title Crematorium Weekend Operations Summary of Savings Proposal Currently cremations are offered Monday to Friday and Saturday morning. In addition, the Book of Remembrance is open for viewing seven days per week, including three hours on a Saturday and five hours on a Sunday. The cost to provide staffing for Saturday and Sunday operation is approximately £25,000 overtime, which exceeds the £5k budget allocated. In 2024 and 2025, there were adequate available weekday slots to accommodate cremations held on a Saturday. It is therefore proposed that cremations and viewings of the Book of Remembrance are offered Monday to Friday only, with the crematoriums closed to the public at weekends. Overtime would still be utilised to cover essential activities including crematorium cooldown after cremations taking place later in the day. This would generate a £5,000 saving in the reduction of overtime budget, and £20,000 cost avoidance. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: There is a risk if service continues to be delivered with a reliance on overtime payments. While there are adequate available weekday slots for demand, residents may wish to hold their loved ones ceremony at the weekend, and may choose to go elsewhere. This would be a loss in income of circa £1k/cremation. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: Potential concern from employees who have frequently been offered overtime at Saturday cremations. Overtime will continue to be required for essential tasks as outlined above. Reputational Risk: There is a risk that residents or visitors react negatively to the removal of access to the book of remembrance at weekends. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 5 0 5 0 5 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1399
Page 56
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gail Macfarlane Saving Ref: 2627 RN07 Saving Title Reduction in Street Cleaning Summary of Savings Proposal The Council’s Greenspace service currently carries out mechanical street cleaning, litter picking, emptying of street bins and graffiti removal in addition to grounds activities. Under this option, it is proposed that the street cleaning function is reduced by 2FTE. The reduction will mean a reduction in litter collection and bin emptying with operatives prioritising town centre locations. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: This group of employees also deliver flood prevention works and filling of grit bins during the winter period so any reduction will also have an impact on the service’s ability to react to inclement weather events. Strategic Risk Register: SR009 Challenges in delivering effective services in relation to Roads and Neighbourhoods. People Risk: 2FTE operatives from the Grounds Service. There are currently no vacancies so will require a reduction of workforce. Reputational Risk: The statutory level of street cleaning would continue to be met through all options. Residents may be critical as the area will not be as clean due to litter collection and bin emptying not carried out as regularly. Cleaning would be undertaken on priority basis so some outlying areas will have a reduced frequency of cleaning. Those areas will see litter lying for longer periods of time and this may lead to an increase in reports of vermin. In addition, these areas may be impacted by flooding as the lack of mechanical sweeping may lead to choked gulleys. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 27.5 2 55 2 55 2 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 0 Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1379
Page 57
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gail Macfarlane Saving Ref: 2627 RN08 Saving Title Introduction of Parking Charging Summary of Savings Proposal Currently motorists are not charged to park within West Dunbartonshire towns and villages. Good parking management is a recognised tool to encourage turnover and improve access to town centre businesses and amenities. This option proposes implementing charges or parking within town centre car parks in Dumbarton, Clydebank, Alexandria and Balloch following the promotion of traffic regulation orders. Motorists would pay to park between the hours of 9am and 6pm on Monday-Saturday with the following proposed tariff: 0 - 2 hour £1 2 – 3 hour £2 3 – 4 hour £3 Over 4 hours £5 Arrangements would be put in place to ensure blue badge holders continue to park without charge. The introduction of charging within council owned public car parks requires the promotion of a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). This must be advertised so stakeholders are given the opportunity to make representation for consideration. It is likely that the TRO process will take in the region of 18 months. Is there a Capital Requirement? Yes, there is a requirement to procure parking charging infrastructure and signage. Costs for instalment of pay machines estimated at £150k capital. Capital will be spent in year 2028/29 and costs £18,725/year Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: There will be a requirement to write and TROs, manage correspondence, monitor the ticket machines, replace tickets and arrange repairs. There is currently limited capacity or resource available to undertake these activities. There is a resource requirement from Legal to progress TROs and to manage objection process. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: Enforcement is reliant on the capacity of Enforcement Officers therefore may require the recruitment of additional officers. This would be funded through income received from parking. Resource required to write and promote TROs, to be funded through enforcement income if available. Reputational Risk: It is not a statutory function to provide free parking. Good parking management encourages turnover and improves access to town centre amenities and facilities for users as discourages long stay parking. This may have negative feedback from employees and residents who currently use Council car parks free of charge. The impact of this would be partially offset by maximising the
Page 58
use of Council owned electric pool vehicles. There are good public transport links to the town centre and the use of these will be promoted to encourage sustainable commuting. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 0 0 0 0 216 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1397
Page 59
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gail Macfarlane Saving Ref: 2627 RN09 Saving Title Reduce number of Apprentices Summary of Savings Proposal The Council’s Roads and Greenspace teams currently offer 11 apprenticeships across both services, with one in Roads and the remainder in Greenspace. The cost per each employee is circa £23k and these posts have been typically difficult to fill, with five currently vacant. Under this option, these five vacant apprenticeships would be deleted, removing the Roads apprentice opportunity, and bringing Greenspace opportunities to six. No apprentices in post will be impacted and as deleted posts are currently vacant there will be no service reduction. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: N/A Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: A reduction in five posts but no existing employees as these posts are currently vacant. Reputational Risk: Although there is a reduction in opportunity to commence an apprenticeship with the council these posts have been difficult to recruit to and the current apprentices will not be impacted. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 115 5 115 5 115 5 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: 5 Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1377
Page 60
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gail Macfarlane Saving Ref: 2627 RN10 Saving Title Cease supply and installation of Christmas Trees Summary of Savings Proposal The Service provide and install a Christmas tree within Dumbarton, Clydebank and Balloch and decorate with lights at a cost of £15,000. This proposal is to cease the supply and installation of three trees and associated lighting. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: N/A Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: N/A Reputational Risk: There is likely to be a negative perception from residents of the towns impacted and criticism of the Council, particularly as it may impact upon footfall. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 15 0 15 0 15 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1378
Page 61
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gail Macfarlane Saving Ref: 2627 RN11 Saving Title Street Sweeping and Litter Collection of Trunk Road Summary of Savings Proposal The Greenspace Team undertake street cleaning and litter collection of the A82 trunk road which is owned and maintained by Transport Scotland. The current cost to undertake is £150,000 per annum. While there is a statutory obligation to undertake these activities, there is no set level of maintenance required. It is therefore proposed the Council makes a saving by reducing the frequency of litter collection and street cleaning of the trunk road. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: There is a risk of flooding if debris and detritus is not cleared frequently. Flooding instances are the responsibility of Transport Scotland and they may challenge a reduction in service. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: N/A Reputational Risk: The trunk road is the main approach to and journey through and into West Dunbartonshire. Increased litter levels with these items lying for longer is likely to generate criticism and impact of the perception of the area’s cleanliness.. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 50 0 50 0 50 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1400
Page 62
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gail Macfarlane Saving Ref: 2627 RN14 Saving Title Purchase of vehicles to replace hire cars Summary of Savings Proposal The Council has for the past five years hired a number of vehicles for use in the delivery of essential work in Roads, Grounds and Caretaking. The annual cost for these hires is £74k. This option proposes the Council reduces its outgoings by purchasing the required vehicles at a cost of £300,000, bringing the annual cost for the vehicles down to £37k. Is there a Capital Requirement? Yes, the cost of procuring 10 vehicles is £300k Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: This will not impact upon service delivery as the vehicles will continue to be available. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: N/A Reputational Risk: No reputational risk. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 20 0 37 0 37 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1381
Page 63
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Gail Macfarlane Saving Ref: 2627 RN15 Saving Title Cease supply of Dog Waste Bags Summary of Savings Proposal The Council provides dog waste bags to residents free of charge, with residents able to collect these from libraries, council buildings and police stations. The Service currently distributes five million dog waste bags per year at a cost of £25,000. This proposal is to cease the supply of free dog waste bags. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: There may be an impact on service capacity should operational workforce be required to increase street cleaning to address dog fouling. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: N/A Reputational Risk: There is likely to be a negative perception from residents who are critical of the Council as they have historically been able to access these free of charge. There may be a perception that there will be higher levels of dog fouling in hotspot areas. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 25 0 25 0 25 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1460
Page 64
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Regulatory & Regeneration Saving Ref: 2627 RR01 Saving Title Communities Team The Communities Team deliver community development work that is shaped by West Dunbartonshire Council’s Community Learning and Development Three Year Plan. The team has 4.75 FTE employees made up of a Communities Team Leader (Grade 8), a Project Development Officer (Grade 6) and three Community Workers (Grade 5). The Community Workers engage at a grass-roots level with communities and support the development of community activity/participation. Activity and project ideas are developed to a certain stage, before being passed to the Project Development Officer to support. Under this proposal, the Communities team would reduce to 3.75 FTE, with the deletion of one of the three Community Worker posts. Additionally, under RR02 (Management Adjustment) some of the work and resources of the communities Team would be directed towards the support of Regeneration activity while under RR03 the part of the time of two officers would be expressly directed towards community engagement surrounding the Clydebank Neighbourhood Board. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: This would have an impact on the volume of community engagement the team would be able to deliver and would impact on annual reporting through the Community Learning and Development Plan. The team would direct its focus more on community planning, with less opportunity to support organic community activity and participation. This is contrary to the Community Wealth Building agenda. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: 1FTE would be lost. Reputational Risk: There is a possibility that the reduction in community activity will be criticised if we fail to meet nationally set targets. Reduction in community activity is likely to be criticised by community activists and others in civic society. Saving (Each Year) 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 42 1 42 1 42 1 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Note that the FTE Impact is an estimate – if the saving option is approved then the Chief Officer will assess the most effective way of delivering the saving target. Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1454
Page 65
2026/27 SAVING OPTION Chief Officer: Alan Douglas Saving Ref: 2627 RR08 Saving Title: Assistance to Businesses Summary of Savings Proposal Business Support in Economic Development have two main funds for supporting businesses. One of these is tied to the UK Shared Prosperity Fund and therefore the Council has little scope to reduce funds. The other fund of circa £70k funds the business start-up grant (£500) and Business Development grant (50% of eligible costs up to maximum of £3k). These funds are typically fully committed. Under this option, a £10k reduction is proposed, maintaining £60k to support businesses. Is there a Capital Requirement? No Risk Associated with Proposed Savings Service Risk: There is a possibility that remaining funds are insufficient to meet demand, particularly when combined with reduction to UK Shared Prosperity Funding. Strategic Risk Register: N/A People Risk: N/A Reputational Risk: Given the anticipated impact of the reduction in shared prosperity funding, it may be that the Council could be seen as unsupportive to local business needs. Saving (Cumulative) 2026/27 2027/27 2028/29 £000 FTE £000 FTE £000 FTE 10 0 10 0 10 0 FTE impact delivered through existing vacancies: N/A Equality Impact Assessment Completed: Yes EIA No: 1453