Agenda and minutes

There were no Declarations of Interest made at the meeting.

There were no members of the public and press present at the meeting.

The Chair announced that this would be Councillor Falvey’s last meeting as she was becoming a Board member of 2010 Rotherham Ltd. and joining the Children and Young Peoples’ Scrutiny Panel

 

The Chair thanked Jackie for her contributions to the work of the Panel.

The Scrutiny Adviser submitted a proposal to undertake a Scrutiny Review of how a Neighbourhood Management Strategy was rolled out in Rotherham.

 

At the June Panel meeting, concern had been expressed about a number of localised problems including the number of void properties, the general street scene, levels of anti-social behaviour and crime, unkempt gardens and poor public perception.

 

Rotherham had significant levels of deprivation.  A variety of organisations and stakeholders were already working towards narrowing the gap but yet many of the issues remained problematic.  The Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy (NRS) and other key documents underpinned the partnership approach to tackling the issues.  The NRS ran until 2010.

 

There were currently various ways in which local areas were managed.  The Review could set out to examine how and where partners worked effectively together.

 

It was also proposed that, due to the potential links with the ‘crime and grime’ agenda, members of the Democratic Renewal Scrutiny Panel be invited to participate in the review.

 

Resolved:-  (1)  That a Scrutiny Review of Rotherham’s Neighbourhood Management Strategy be undertaken.

 

(2)  That Councillors Cutts, Havenhand, Lakin and P. A. Russell together with Alex Armitage form part of the steering group.

Further to Minute No. 21 of 16^th July, 2009, a report was submitted on the progress made against the 24 recommendations resulting from the Scrutiny Review.

 

Progress included:-

 

-        Further consultation and an analysis undertaken of the impact of introducing a Sub-Regional Choice Based Letting scheme

-        Increased nominations to 100% with 5 RSLs

-        Reference to the Adult social care assessment in the Allocation Policy

-        Completed evaluation of under occupancy in Council tenancies

-        “Fair and Flexible Guidance”

-        Development of weekly reports informing of real time numbers on housing register, bidders and non-bidders

-        Redesign of Key Choices website

-        Weekly results sheet showing the status of previously advertised properties

 

A number of the recommendations had financial implications including virtual property tours and the provision of more information.  Key Choices had carried out investigations to identify funding streams.

 

Sandra Tolley gave the following powerpoint presentation:-

 

-        Purpose of CBL Review

To find out the customer experience of the Choice Based Lettings (CBL) Service and to identify any gaps in the service and any areas of work for further development”

 

-        “Fair and Flexible – Draft statutory guidance on social housing allocations for local authorities in England” (31^st July, 2009)

CLG asked all local authorities a series of questions regarding the proposed changes to the Code of Guidance in Allocations

 

Findings

More than 1,000 customers completed and returned a survey/questionnaire

The Scrutiny Review and Fair and Flexible provides good intelligence about what needs to be done to improve the understanding and operation of the CBL system and make changes to the Allocation Policy

 

-        Recommendation 5 – The Housing Allocations Policy

o             Offer more choice and mobility to tenants and prospective tenants

o             Allow more freedom to prioritise needs specific to local areas

o             Demonstrate transparency – Scrutiny Review

We can consider

o             Introducing a Rural Priority Lettings Policy

o             Set aside a proportion of vacancies for applicants in employment and help people to live closer to their place of work

o             Analyse waiting time re the lettings quotas

 

-        Recommendation 7 – Introduction of ‘real-time’ feedback

 

-        Recommendation 8 – Managing the Housing Register

o             Participating fully on COntinuous REcording (CORE)

o             Weekly reports to inform of real time numbers on housing register, bidders and non-bidders

o             A bi-monthly training programme to raise understanding of inputting and updating of housing applications

o             Weekly reporting tools that highlight “user errors”

o             Procured a CBL software package that manages the housing register, each application will be reviewed annually

 

-        Recommendation 12 – Alternative title to “Direct Homes”

o             61% knew what a “Direct Home” was

o             90% thought “Direct Homes” should be advertised until allocated

o             63% thought that information on adverts were clear

o             60% used the Rotherham Advertiser to view and request properties

 

-        Recommendation 13 – Improve Information Profile of RMBC Housing Stock

 

-        Recommendation 14 – ‘Virtual Tours” of the Area

 

-        Recommendation 20 – Information at Neighbourhood Offices  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

Jane Davies-Haire, Landlord Relations Manager, submitted a progress report against the Scrutiny Review recommendations.  Of the 7, 4 had been completed with the remaining 3 on target.

 

The aim of the Review was to consider the current process for re-letting void properties and make recommendations for improvements in order to minimise the length of time that houses were empty and provide a more effective service for tenants.

 

It was noted that officers were currently undertaking 2 separate pieces of work related to void turnaround times.  Firstly the Service Performance and Service Quality Teams had carried out a number of ‘reality checks’ of 2010 Rotherham Ltd.’s performance on void turnaround times in response to concerns expressed by the Scrutiny Panel.  The reality checks had highlighted concerns over performance and a series of meetings would take place to consider action required to rectify this. 

 

Progress made so far was as follows:-

 

Recommendation 1 – That improvements are made to the CBL process in line with the recommendations of the current Scrutiny Review

See previous Minute.

 

Recommendation 2 – That the verification process is made more efficient by screening out ineligible bids at an earlier stage

The Anite IT system had now been updated to include a verification module.

 

Recommendation 3 – That clear criteria are published about the circumstances in which decorating vouchers will be issued to new tenants and that the allowance of £25 per room is reviewed

2010 were reviewing the allowance.

 

Recommendation 4 – That in line with good practice demonstrated by high performing ALMOS, consideration is given to a reward scheme to encourage tenants to leave properties in good condition

A pilot ‘fond farewell’ scheme had been implemented which incentivised tenants to leave their home and garden in a good condition by offering a payment of £100.

 

Recommendation 5 – That information is provided to Elected Members on a regular basis on the void properties in their Ward including reasons why a property is empty and when it is expected to be re-let

The weekly estate management update produced by Neighbourhood Champions now included information about empty properties.  The Empty Homes Team also provides neighbourhood staff with a monthly update for every empty property stating the estimated completion date and/or reasons for delay.

 

Recommendation 6 – That more detailed information is provided when reporting on voids to give a clearer picture of why properties are empty and the financial implications

Establishment of a joint working group including officers from Neighbourhood Investment Service to jointly review properties that had been empty for over 16 weeks.

 

Recommendation 7 – That action taken towards the recommendations of 2010 Rotherham Ltd.’s Empty Homes Service Review ‘every day counts’ (April, 2009) be monitored and reported back to the Sustainable Communities Scrutiny Panel in due course

Of the 16 recommendations, 12 were either complete or mostly complete.

 

Discussion ensued on the report with the following issues highlighted:-

 

-        Members now received regular information on empty properties

 

-        There had been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

(see attached powerpoint presentation)

Paul Benson, Private Sector Officer, gave the following powerpoint presentation:-

 

Why bring empties back into use?

-        Reduce neighbourhood blight

-        Help reduce crime and disorder and the fear of crime

-        Creating a more sustainable housing market that contributes to strong neighbourhoods

-        Maximise income

-        Improve decency standards in older homes

-        Contribute towards affordable housing

 

Current Picture

-        Empty Homes Agency (January 2009)

783,633 empty dwellings in England

3.5% of all dwellings

-        Rotherham position 4,273 (3.88%) dwellings

-        Increase from 3.1% in 2007/08

 

Reason for Increase

-        Potential new households choosing to remain with parents/family for longer

-        Households in financial difficulty returning to their parents or family

-        Lack of available mortgage products leading to reduced sales

 

Rotherham mid-year picture

-        Reduction in the number of empties to 3,811 (3.53%)

 

Council-owned Public Sector Empties

-        Monitored by 2010

Empty Property Strategy, Action Plan and Indicators

-        Reasons unable to let

Managed by others e.g. EDS, C&YPS, ECL

Disinvestment e.g. designated for demolition

Decent Homes improvements

Rotherham Asylum Project Team

Property being reviewed by Neighbourhood Investment Services

Community Buildings

 

Empty Property Working Group

-        Consisting of:-

Key Choices – allocation

Community Protection Unit – enforcement

Neighbourhood Investment Services – enabling and delivery

2010 – managing Council-owned properties

 

Empty Property Policy

-        Joint document to tackle both public and private empties

-        Provide strategic direction

-        Outline the extent of the problem

-        Build on previous activity

 

What if we do not bring properties back into use?

-        Adverse effect on CPA rating (H18)

-        Failure to meet targets

-        Future funding allocations

 

Resources

-        2009/10

Proactive enforcement team funded (180,000)

Targeting affected areas

Producing the Empty Property Policy

-        2010/11

Financial commitment to support 3 officers (£36,000)

 

What next?

-        Improve performance

-        Monthly meetings of the cross-Directorate Empty Property Working Group

-        Production of a joint Empty Property Policy to be reported in April, 2010

-        Monitor Council-owned voids – agree to re-let, demolish or sell

-        Continued pro-active activity within Maltby and Dinnington

-        Reactive response to bring problematic long and short term private sector empties back into use

 

Discussion ensued on the presentation with the following issues highlighted:-

 

-        The Working Group had met once so far; it was the intention to invite RSLs

 

-        There were a number of empty properties in the ownership of RSLs. Work was taking place on identifying whether it was the same couple of landlords who owned them

 

-        Some landlords were offering up their empty properties for the Rent in Advance Scheme

 

-        The Working Group would investigate those properties with exemptions in order to get a true picture of the number of empty properties in the Borough

 

-        Where ownership of a property was not known, Council Tax was contacted.  No Council Tax was paid on an empty property for the first 6 months.  A representative from the Section would attend the Working Group to ascertain if there was any pressure that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

- minutes of meetings held on 19^th October, 2^nd and 16^th November, 2009

The Panel noted the decisions made under delegated powers by the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods held on 19^th October, 2^nd and 16^th November, 2009.

- minutes of meeting held on 29^th October, 2009

The minutes of the meeting held on 29th October, 2009, were agreed.

- minutes of meetings held on 23^rd October and 6^th November, 2009

The minutes of the Performance and Scrutiny Overview Committee held on 23rd October and 6^th November, 2009, were noted.

- minutes of meeting held on 24^th November, 2009

The minutes of the above Working Party held on 24th November, 2009, attended by Councillor Sharman (in the Chair), Councillors Doyle and Hussain were 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 Paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))

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 Paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the Council)).

In accordance with Minute No. 66 of 29^th October, 2009, Paul Walsh, Neighbourhood Investment Services, reported on non-traditional properties together with the investment options available for those properties purchased under the Right to Buy Scheme.

 

To date, the Council had approved structural works and Decent Homes investment in 669 non-traditional Council-owned properties following a detailed option appraisal process and indepth consultation.  Of the remaining 141 properties, of varying non-traditional construction, it had been recommended that investment be undertaken in 137 properties which had been identified as sustainable.

 

With regard to the approved investment programme, structural works were being undertaken on a prioritised basis dependent upon the level of structural defects identified and funding availability.  To date, structural works had been completed to 22 Airey properties with work currently underway to a further 92.

 

Funding of £2.98M to support investment in 92 Airey properties was contained within the 2009/10 Housing Investment Programme.  A further £1,007,500 was required to undertake structural works to a further 31 within 2010/11.

 

The Neighbourhood Investment Service was exploring a variety of funding sources to finance the work required to the remaining non-traditional properties approved for investment.

 

Funding being offered to private householders through the Regional Home Appreciation Loan package had recently been significantly reduced and was currently fully committed.  Alternative options were being reviewed to help owner-occupiers invest in their properties as set out in Appendix 2 of the report submitted.  The cost of investment in private sector non-traditional homes was set out in Appendix 3.

 

Resolved:-  (1)  That the report be noted.

 

(2)  That the investment options available for private sector occupiers be noted.