Agenda and minutes

The Chair reported receipt of a petition, containing, 43 signatures, from residents of Braithwell Road/Newland Avenue/Chadwick Drive, Maltby, asking that a decision on the future of the tarran properties at Maltby be deferred for 1 month.

The petitioners had contacted Kevin Barron, M.P., who was looking into the possibility of a reinstatement scheme for the properties and was to consult with the Minister for Housing.

The deferment would also allow proper consideration to be given to the report by the independent consultants which had been received recently.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the petition be received and the request for a 1 month deferment be approved to enable further investigations/consultation to take place.

(2)  That a copy of the independent consultants’ report be supplied to the TARA Group, Mrs. Laird and Mrs. Clements for them to circulate to the appropriate persons.

- to consider the amalgamation of Westpit Hill and Hurley Croft

Further to Minute No. 80 of 25^th October, 2004, the Housing Manager submitted a report in response to a petition from Westpit Hill tenants requesting free use of the Hurley Croft communal facility.

The issue had been ongoing for many years and in May, 2001, a decision was made to allow the tenants the opportunity to pay the weekly charge (£3.90) and join the Hurley Croft Sheltered Scheme.  Only 1 resident took up the opportunity.  Staff from the Wath Office had visited the tenants of both Hurley Croft and Westpit Hill in order to ascertain the situation.

All 32 residents at Hurley Croft had been visited of whom 26 stated they would not object to the Westpit Hill tenants using the communal facility provided that they paid the weekly charge.  5 residents could not be contacted and 1 would not state why she objected.

At Westpit Hill, 24 of the 28 residents stated they had no desire to use the Centre although some would reconsider if there was no charge.  3 residents expressed an interest in using the Centre and paying the weekly charge.  1 already paid the charge and used the Centre.

It was quite clear from the history, that a decision to allow the residents of Westpit Hill free use of the communal facility would be very unpopular.  The Hurley Croft residents were adamant that Westpit Hill residents should pay for the use of the Centre.

The majority of residents from both areas felt that the Centre should be free of charge and open to all residents.  This was not practical as the mandatory charge on the rent paid for the running of the communal facilities in sheltered housing.  Without that income it was unlikely the buildings would be sustainable and consideration had to be given to the fact that they were situated in sheltered housing complexes.

It was unclear why the 2 schemes were not originally designated as 1 sheltered scheme.  It was proposed to amalgamate the schemes, therefore, all new tenancies on Westpit Hill would be let as ‘sheltered’ with a mandatory charge on the rent for the communal facility.  The existing tenants of Westpit Hill could be given the option of joining the Hurley Croft scheme now and having the communal facility charge added to the rent account.  However, this would be on the understanding that if the charge was added it would not be removed at a later date.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the Westpit Hill OAP Bungalow Scheme and the Hurley Croft Sheltered Housing Scheme be amalgamated so that all new allocations had a mandatory charge on the rent account to cover the use of the communal facility.

(2)  That the existing tenants of Westpit Hill be given the option of using the Hurley Croft communal facility if they agreed to pay the communal facility charge.

- to approve the introduction of the revised Decoration Allowance Policy

The Housing Manager submitted a report proposing a revised Decoration Allowance Policy and Procedure to address concerns identified by the Audit Commission and contribute to the delivery of a three star Repair and Maintenance Service.

The Audit Commission had identified the need to revise the Policy to ensure that allowances were allocated equitably and performance and satisfaction were systematically evaluated.  The current Policy and guidance for issuing decoration allowances was limited.  The Lettings Policy stated that £25.00 could be offered for each habitable room but it gave no guidance in what circumstances an allowance may be offered.  The figure had also been used as a guide by officers using an allowance where decorations had been disturbed by improvement programmes.   There had been no identification of the duty that the Local Authority had under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to replace like with like and/or compensate for decorations damaged during repair work.

The current system of payment to the customer also lacked choice.  All payments were made using Focus vouchers.  This arrangement was negotiated with a 10% discount for the Authority by RBT procurement.  Complaints had been received from customers about the accessibility of stores.

The main features of the revised procedures were that it:-

-        Ensured an equitable service by defining a decoration standard for voids and provided guidance in what circumstances an allowance could be paid;

-        Expanded the allowance to non-habitable rooms such as hall and stairways;

-        Recognised that some rooms were more expensive to decorate than others and set a sliding scale of allowance to match;

-        Explained the obligations that arose from the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985;

-        Improved accessibility of the scheme by expanding the choice of payment methods to include cheques and a credit on the rent account;

-        Included a decoration allowance leaflet to improve the customer’s awareness of the service;

-        Introduced a decoration allowance contract with the customer which clarified the responsibility of the customer and improved the audit of the service;

-        Allowed for the future improvement of the service by introducing service standards and a customer satisfaction survey to identify customers’ needs and aspirations.

The revised Policy and Procedure would be monitored on a 6 monthly basis to audit the equitable distribution of allowances and satisfaction with the Service.

The Decoration Allowance budget for empty properties and compensation for damage caused by repair work in 2004/05 was £50,000.  The total value of allowances paid in the first 6 months was £23,460 with all but £645 being allocated to customers taking new tenancies.  If the same rate of expenditure was to continue to the end of the year, the budget would be 94% spent.  On average decoration allowances were allocated to 36% of all new tenants, the average amount being £66.32 to decorate approximately 3 habitable rooms.

A Decoration Allowance budget of £75,000 was provisionally allocated in the draft Annual Maintenance Plan for 2005/06.  This was based on the maximum amount per room for voids remaining at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 143.

- to note the report

The Waste Strategy Manager reported on the latest situation with regard to the high winds experienced over the weekend and the effect it had had on the waste collection service.  Operatives had worked Saturday and Sunday to ensure household waste bins had been collected and contingency arrangements made for the disposal of the contents.

Further to Minute No. 187 of 19^th January, 2004, the Head of Neighbourhoods submitted a report outlining the present status of the Authority’s 6 closed landfill sites and the options available for their development.

In its capacity as the Waste Disposal Authority, the Authority had responsibility for ensuring former landfill site, now closed to operations, were maintained in a safe and appropriate manner.  This entailed making the appropriate arrangements for ensuring gas levels within the sites were closely monitored to ensure they were within safe limits and action taken to contain or disperse leachate produced within them.  All of the Authority’s closed sites had the appropriate gas and leachate management systems installed to meet those obligations.  The Council was also required to return the sites to pre-determined standards contained within the original planning consent for each site.

The cost of routine monitoring and the servicing of flares etc. were contained within the current revenue budget.  Capital projects, such as the installation of automatic gas monitoring equipment, had in the past been financed by Supplementary Credit Approvals which had been subject to a bidding process to DEFRA on an annual basis.  Any scheme was then assessed by the Environment Agency on behalf of DEFRA.  These Approvals had now been renamed ContaminatedLand: Application for Capital Projects.

Funding from the South Yorkshire Forest Partnership and the Forestry Commission was now financing the tree planting scheme at Warren Vale and currently considering the potential for a scheme at KivetonPark.  The only cost to the Authority was the aftercare in years 2 to 5 after the initial planting.

Appendix 1 submitted stated the status of each of the closed landfill sites.

Resolved:-  That the report be noted.

Resolved:-  That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in those paragraphs indicated below of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972:-

Resolved:-  That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in those paragraphs indicated below of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

(Exempt under Paragraph 9 of the Act – negotiation of terms for the supply of services)

The Waste Strategy Manager submitted a report outlining a request received for a variation to the current contract on the payment of the recycling premium.  At present, the contract allowed for the recycling premium to be paid on an annual basis.  The Council’s partner had formally requested that the premium be paid on a quarterly basis and, if payment was made within 30 days, they would offer a 2.5% discount to the Council.

The contract was a joint contract with Barnsley and Doncaster Councils.  Discussion had taken place with representatives of Legal Services on the proposal who were agreeable to a variation in the contract in conjunction with the partner authorities. 

Resolve:-  (1)  That the variation of the contract to allow for the payment of the recycling premium on a quarterly basis be approved.

(2)  That the receipt of a discounted rate of 2.5% on subsequent recycling premium invoices, subject to payment terms being met, be approved.

(Exempt under Paragraph 9 of the Act – negotiation of terms for the supply of services)

(Exempt under Paragraphs 3 and 8 of the Act – accommodation provided by the Local Authority/expenditure proposed to be incurred by the Authority)

The Finance and Accountancy Manager submitted a report setting out the proposed housing rents and budgets for 2005/06 based on the Government’s Housing Subsidy Settlement for the Council’s Housing Revenue Account.

It was proposed that average housing rents be increased by 6.4% which equated to £46.48 per week for 48 weeks.  This was the 3^rd year that the Council had applied the rent convergence rules that would allow it to move to using formula rents for properties by 2012.  The changes were being achieved incrementally with caps or limits on the increase in rent for a property in any 1 year to protect tenants.  Applying the formula meant that the average rent for a Council property next year would be consistent with the “Limit Rent”. 

It was proposed that a decision on increases in all fees and charges for additional services e.g. Wardens and Rothercare be deferred pending a meeting of the Supporting People Board in light of the uncertainty surrounding the Supporting People Grant.

It was noted that the Environment Scrutiny Panel was to consider the report at its meeting on 13^th January, 2004.

Resolved:-  That, subject to the concurrence of the Environment Scrutiny Panel, the Cabinet be asked to recommend to Council:-

(1)  That the Council rents be set at the levels determined by the application of the formula rents i.e. an average of £46.48 per week for 48 weeks, an average increase of 6.4%.

(2)  That any decisions on increases in all fees and charges for additional services be deferred until after the January meeting of the Supporting People Board.

(3)  That a prudent approach be adopted to the 2005/06 budget which assumed no cash increase in resources.

(4)  That savings from within the additional items, funded by the subsidy windfall in the 2004/05 budget, be identified.

(Exempt under Paragraphs 3 and 8 of the Act – accommodation provided by the Local Authority/expenditure proposed to be incurred by the Local Authority)