Job cuts are expected at Luton Borough Council this year as the authority tightens its belt.

About 90 posts are expected to be axed, but the council says only 35 staff should be directly affected, as many of the positions involved are already vacant.

The council wants to save £6.3 million in the next financial year, and the budget report will go before the council's executive committee on Monday night (February 8), outlining the cuts needed to help it reach its target.

A spokesman said: "As a direct result of the budget-setting process for 2010-11, 35 occupied posts are at risk of redundancy. "However, Luton Borough Council has a redeployment policy and an excellent record at redeploying staff into vacant posts. As a result, we expect the number who actually lose jobs to be very low indeed."

Finance officers at the council hope to keep Luton's rates rise below two per cent, which would be below the rate of inflation and below the average of other authorities who so have far revealed their budget plans.

But the report warns there are tough times ahead, and that 'budgets for all authorities are overshadowed by the uncertain prospects for public spending in the future'.

It says major reductions in spending on public services are expected in the years ahead. Cuts, however, will be in areas where the council can become more efficient, and should not impact on the 'quality of service to the public', the report continues.

One area under scrutiny is investment in major projects in Luton, including the Building Schools for the Future programme, the Luton Aquatic Centre and the Luton Dunstable Busway.

The report continues: "This level of investment is very important for the local economy at a time of recession and is a key part of the council's commitment to contuning the successful transformation of Luton.

"However, the scale of the proposed programme, for a council of Luton's size and level of resources, is the major budget risk.

"This has been reported as a major risk for the last few years. In view of the prospects for public finances, the problem is even bigger now. The advice is that if the issue was only looked at from a financial prudence viewpoint, the council should not commit to a capital programme of this scale at this point in time."

Although much of the funding for the projects has come from grants, there is still risk involved for the council because of variations or overspending. A team has now been put in place to monitor major projects, the report adds.