Agenda and minutes

In accordance with Minute No. 103 of 10^th November, 2008, the Director of Housing and Neighbourhood Services reported on the impact of the introduction of the stray dog provisions of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act together with issues that had emerged.

Since the introduction of the Legislative changes, there had been an increase in the reports of stray dogs made to the Council.  Whilst the increase for the Council could be expected, it was not possible to have an accurate “before” and “after” comparison of total stray dog reports in the Borough due to Police stray dog recording limitations.  However, from consolidation of the Council data and Police figures, it would appear that there had not been a significant increase overall in the total number of stray dogs in the Borough.

From analysis of the work, it appeared that there had been an overall reduction in the last 2 years in the number of dogs seized in the Rotherham area.  However, it should be noted that previously approximately 400 dogs had been delivered to Police Stations and, therefore, did not require proactive collection.  Removal of the Police service had resulted in the 2 Dog Wardens seizing 75 (20%) more dogs than they had in the previous year.

The consequent overall impact on the kennelling arrangement had been a 42% increase in the number of dogs being processed through the contracted Kennels at Doncaster.  In considering the likely increase in the number of dogs that the Council was to deal with, the 2008/09 revenue budget had been increased by £10,000 to cover the costs of the statutory duties.  This had funded 7 additional kennels at the main contracted kennels and an out of hours transit kennel arrangement in Rotherham that was linked via Rothercare Direct to an out of hours service to transfer the stray dogs to Doncaster.

The new duties had resulted in a £12,216 spend for 2009/10 of which the out of hours service costs were £8,728.  The commitment above the £10,000 had been absorbed as efficiency by the service in the Rotherham Warden cost centre.  A review of the potential efficiency savings that could be made against the full Dog Warden Service was being assessed and would be reported in due course.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the effectiveness of the out of hours facility and recent changes made to accommodate improved on site out of hours customer service be noted.

(2)  That the further work being undertaken to determine the best form of out of hours provision be recognised and that a further report be submitted within 6 months to provide value for money options for the Service.

The Director of Housing and Neighbourhood Services reported on proposals by Rother Valley West, Rother Valley South and Wentworth Valley Area Assemblies to purchase CCTV cameras from their devolved budgets.

Approval was sought to waive Standing Order No. 48.1 which required between 3 to 6 tenders for contracts with an estimated value of £50,000 or more to be sought.  The cost of purchasing of 7 CCTV cameras and 3 laptops to operate them would be £65,725.

South Yorkshire Crime Reduction/Architectural Liaison Officer had recommended the Mocam system as the best option in terms of value for money, better capacity in terms of mobility and flexibility, improved picture quality and compatible with systems already used in Rotherham and across South Yorkshire.

The Assistant Chief Executive (Legal and Democratic Services) and the Strategic Director of Corporate Finance both support the recommendations.

Resolved:-  (1)  That Standing Order No. 48.1 (requirement to obtain between 3 to 6 tenders for contracts with an estimated value of £50,000 or more) be waived for the purchase of 7 CCTV cameras and 3 laptops.

(2)  That the contract be awarded to Mocam.

The Service Performance Manager presented a report outlining the 2008/09 Key Performance Indicator year end results for the Housing and Neighbourhoods element of the Directorate.

At the end of the year, 15 (75%) of the Key Performance Indicators achieved their year end targets and 50% improved upon their position last year.  For those Indicators directly managed by Neighbourhoods, for the second successive year, 100% of the KPIs achieved their target.  80% of the Indicators improved from last year and of the nationwide comparable Indicators, were all now within the top quartile.

For the Indicators managed by 2010 Rotherham Ltd., 50% of the KPIs achieved their targets compared to 70% last year.  However, 57% were now within the All England top quartile position compared to 42% last year.  The progress made within the Decent Homes Programme (55% reduction in non-decency during 2008/09) ensured that the Authority continued to be ranked in the top quartile.

The 2010 Rotherham Indicators that did not meet the target were:-

-        Urgent Repairs Completed in Time

-        Average Relet Time

-        % Planned v Response Maintenance

-        National Indicator 160 Overall Satisfaction with the Landlord Service

-        Tenants in Rent Arrears

There were also a number of Indicators that were able to demonstrate substantial improvements compared to the previous year:-

-        Private Sector Vacancies brought back into Use or Demolished (Neighbourhoods)

-        National Indicator 158 - % Change in Decent Homes (2010 Rotherham Ltd.)

-        National Indicator 155 – Number of Affordable Homes Delivered (Neighbourhoods)

Discussion ensued on BV66b (% of Local Authority tenants with more than 7 weeks (gross) rent arrears).  2010 Rotherham Ltd. had put in place a number of initiatives with the Housing Income Team to reduce the impact on performance.  They had taken part in the Council’s credit crunch roadshows where customers were offered debt advice and payment arrangements and the introduction of incentives for customers who cleared their accounts before the end of the year.  However, there was a need to look at the historical rent arrears and their possible reclamation. 

Resolved:-  That the audited year end results for the Housing and Neighbourhoods element of the Directorate 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 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.

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 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))

The Director of Housing and Neighbourhood Services reported receipt of a petition from a number of residents of properties at Catcliffe requesting that consideration be given to the Council providing compensation and an increase in the decoration allowance.

The report provided details of the level of works carried out at their properties and the impact on the tenants.  During the pre-contract consultations, tenants were advised to expect some damage around the windows and doors as well as an increase in dust, dirt and noise.  The Council had offered to re-house any tenant who may have experienced health problems due to the works.  All tenants stated they were happy to remain in their homes.

The site had been inspected on 2 occasions by the Considerate Constructors Scheme.  The site had been awarded an excellent score (37 out of a potential 40) for ensuring that there was a minimum disruption level to tenants and residents within the area.  Tenants had also been visited on a regular basis by a Tenant Liaison Officer to ensure that any potential issues were addressed immediately.  The contractors had received 3 letters of thanks for their thoughtful approach whilst works were being undertaken.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the funding for the installation of floor coverings or a contribution to re-carpeting costs, up to a value of £65.00, be approved where a shortfall in carpet had been created and where no other solution had already been provided by the Council or its approved contractors.

(2)  That no other compensation payments be made in regard to improvement works in this area.

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))

The Director of Housing and Neighbourhood Services submitted a request to appoint a contractor to undertake structural repairs to 92 ‘Airey’ non-traditional properties across the Borough previously approved for investment (Minute Nos. 49 of 28^th July, 2008 and 196 of 20^th April, 2009, refers).

Resolved:-  That the report be deferred for further information and submitted to a future meeting.

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))

The Director of Housing and Neighbourhood Services presented a report containing an evaluation of the performance and cost savings achieved through the preferred partner contract secured by 2010 Rotherham Ltd. which commenced on 1^st December, 2008.

Evaluation undertaken jointly with RBT had highlighted continuous failures by 2010 to submit accurate and detailed invoices for completed work.  Invoices submitted for completed works were often inaccurate and inconsistent with the agreed invoicing format and the schedule of rates agreed within the contract.

2010 had, however, seen consistently high satisfaction levels from customers who had had adaptations in terms of the quality of work being delivered.

It was proposed that the contract be extended until the end of March, 2010, rather than beyond 1^st December, 2009, for a further 12 month period to allow time for a further review to take place of performance issues.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the contract be extended until the end of March, 2010.

(2)  That a further report be submitted in January, 2010, with final recommendations about any further extension of re-tendering from April, 2010 onwards.

(Exempt under Paragraph 3 of the Act - information relating to the financial or business affairs of any person (including the Council))