Agenda and draft minutes

To consider the minutes of the previous meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board held on 15 October 2025 and to approve them as a true and correct record of the proceedings and to be signed by the Chair.

Resolved: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board held on 15 October 2025 be approved as a true record.

To receive declarations of interest from Members in respect of items listed on the agenda.

In relation to the Call-in - Selective Licensing Policy item on the agenda Councillor Tinsley declared that he had previously held a licence in Maltby. It was not a financial interest.

To receive questions relating to items of business on the agenda from members of the public or press who are present at the meeting.

No questions were received.

To consider whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of any part of the agenda.

There were no reasons to exclude the press or public.

Report from the Strategic Director of Finance and Customer Services.

Recommendations:

1. That Cabinet note the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2025/26 to 2028/29 update.

At the Chair’s invitation, Councillor Alam, Cabinet Member for Finance & Community Safety introduced the report explaining that the reports was an update on the council’s budget and the medium-term financial strategy to 2028-29. It included the standard technical base required, recognition of financial pressures impacting service delivery, and the ongoing effect of inflation on the council’s base costs.

The technical adjustments also included the council’s assessment of the potential impact of the government’s fair funding review, which aimed to make significant changes to the way local authority funding was allocated. The review was expected to introduce major changes to the formulas used for funding distribution, and it appeared that more areas would require additional funding.

The medium-term financial strategy was scheduled for further revision ahead of the council’s budget-setting in March 2026 to reflect the local government settlement once issued, along with budget policy proposals on council tax levels, reserves, fees and charges, and any required budget savings.

The funding review represented the most significant change in local government funding approaches for many years and introduced a degree of uncertainty. The medium-term review sat alongside financial monitoring, which was presented to Cabinet and projected a financial overspend of £0.9 million.

Council tax collection rates remained strong despite cost-of-living challenges faced by residents and businesses. However, due to the impact of Speciality Steel, there was a potential effect on business rates. The Council expected to balance its budget to the outturn position before year-end, although risks remained, and the use of reserves might have been required.

Judith Badger, Strategic Director for Finance and Customer Services followed on by explaining to members that this was a point in time based on the Council’s best understanding of the situation, with some significant changes since the budget was set in the Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) back in March.

Members of Scrutiny were due to receive the presentation on the final MTFS near budget time in the usual way, but an update at this point in the year was provided to bring members up to date with how the position was looking. It was a plan based on planning assumptions, estimates, and available information, and the government’s budget at the end of the month was expected to give some indications of new factors to consider and whether they aligned with the Council’s expectations.

The Strategic Director for Finance and Customer Services pointed out to members that this reflected only the national policy position and not the Council’s settlement. The actual settlement, knowing how much money the Council would receive from government, was not expected until quite close to Christmas, likely late December. So, this was presented to bring members up to speed, but it was highly likely the position would change again later in the year when the Finance team took Members through the detail before budget setting.

The Chair asked Rob Mahon, Assistant Director, Financial Services to run through the key changes concentrating on the children's services aspect. The Assistant Director, Financial Services noted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.

Report from the Strategic Director of Regeneration and Environment.

Recommendations:

That Cabinet:

1. Approve a consultation with stakeholders to be undertaken in respect of the General Enforcement Policy to inform a review.

2. Note that a refreshed Policy will then be presented to Cabinet in May 2026 following the consultation.

At the Chair’s invitation, Councillor Alam, Cabinet Member for Finance & Community Safety introduced the report noting that the Council adopted the General Enforcement Policy in May 2023, as required by statutory guidance to ensure engagement with regulators, residents, businesses, and other stakeholders in policy development. The review aimed to confirm stakeholder consultation and identify any necessary amendments. Consultation was scheduled from 1 December 2025 to 27 February 2026, involving council colleagues, elected members, partners, stakeholders, and the public. The adopted review policies were set out in Appendix 1, and the consultation plan in Appendix 2. Following consultation and analysis, a refreshed policy was planned for presentation to Cabinet in May 2026 for consideration.

The Strategic Director for Regeneration and Environment said the Council last reviewed its enforcement policy in 2023. Cabinet was asked to approve consultation on proposed changes, scheduled for December and January, with a further report planned for spring to adopt a revised policy.

The Chair invited members of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board (OSMB) to raise questions and queries on the points raised.

Councillor Yasseen provided feedback prior to consultation, recommending a relationship-based approach to enforcement focused on education and support rather than punitive measures. It was suggested that the consultation team work with the corporate community engagement team to strengthen engagement. The need for Equality Impact Assessments to address impacts on protected groups rather than only reporting respondent demographics was highlighted.

In response Sam Barstow, the Assistant Director for Community Safety and Street Scene welcomed members’ comments and agreed that the core aim of the enforcement policy remained achieving compliance. It was noted that most issues were resolved early without formal enforcement, though the Council would act robustly where necessary. The Assistant Director, Community Safety and Street Scene confirmed that feedback on consultation and equality duties would be taken forward, with officers working closely with other departments and ensuring a strong focus on equality in decision-making.

Councillor A Carter raised concerns about the Equality Impact Assessment, noting it stated no impact on protected characteristics. It was suggested that enforcement could disproportionately affect these groups and that the consultation plan lacked measures to engage hard-to-reach groups, such as those with disabilities or limited literacy. Councillor A Carter did not support recommending the consultation to Cabinet in its current form.

The Chair asked how the authority would ensure engagement with hard-to-reach groups, including those for whom English is not a first language.

The Assistant Director for Community Safety and Street Scene clarified that Cabinet was being asked to approve consultation, not the enforcement policy itself. A full Equality and Diversity Impact Assessment would be completed when the revised policy was considered post-consultation. Members were assured that consultation would aim to reach all parts of the community, including internal stakeholders, councillors, partners, businesses, and community groups. Methods included online surveys, printed copies in libraries and community venues, social media promotion, direct notifications to councillors and businesses, and public events in accessible locations. Key stakeholders such as South Yorkshire  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

To consider the Annual Compliments and Complaints Report 2024/25

At the Chair’s invitation, Councillor Alam, Cabinet Member for Finance & Community Safety introduced the report noting this was the annual report covering formal compliments and complaints for the 2024-25 financial year. Overall complaints received by the Council decreased by 1%. Complaints remained an important tool for learning and improving services.

The report included performance data broken down by Council directorates, enabling assessment at both Council and team levels. Complaints were noted as valuable for identifying issues, checking processes, and making necessary apologies and corrections. The Council had continued to make it easier for people to complain through multiple channels, including writing, email, and text.

Headline figures showed compliments increased from 902 to 1,309 (a 45% rise), continuing the year-on-year upward trend. Social Care recorded the largest increase, followed by Environment Services and Housing. Most complaints were resolved at Stage One, with only four reaching Stage Three for Member Review Panel consideration.

The Strategic Director of Finance and Customer Services gave a presentation on the annual compliments and complaints report for the period up to March 2025, highlighting key points. It was reported that previous recommendations from the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board (OSMB) had been addressed, including an all-member session in March covering complaint management procedures and member roles.

Headline figures showed complaints decreased slightly by 1%, from 1,212 to 1,198. This was still the third-highest total in the past five years, indicating further work was needed.

The graph in the presentation showed complaints (red line) rising over previous years, followed by a slight drop and levelling off last year. It was noted that further reduction was needed. Compliments (green line) continued to rise steadily over five years, increasing from 902 to 1,309 last year, largely driven by Adult Care.

Of the 1,198 complaints received, 369 (31%) were upheld, an increase from 294 the previous year, though the proportion remained consistent at around one-third. The largest category was quality of service, followed by lack of service and staff conduct/attitude, which decreased compared to the previous year. Most complaints (93.5%) were resolved at Stage One; 42 progressed to Stage Two and only four reached Stage Three.

By directorate, Housing and Regeneration & Environment recorded the highest complaint volumes. Regeneration & Environment saw the largest absolute increase, rising from 373 to 468 (25%), followed by Children and Young People’s Services.

Housing complaints decreased from 615 to 471, and the Assistant Chief Executive’s directorate reduced from five to three. Public Health remained at zero complaints.

The increase in Regeneration & Environment was mainly due to waste management issues from the previous year, rising from 165 to 267. Children and Young People’s Services also saw an increase in EHCP-related complaints, from 14 to 24, reflecting a national challenge. Despite the higher volume of complaints, Regeneration & Environment achieved the largest improvement in timeliness, increasing from 79% to 85%, meeting the Council’s target. Overall, 81% of complaints were responded to within timescales, compared to 82% the previous year, still below the 85% target. Finance and Customer Services recorded the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.

To consider the reasons for the call-in request relating to the Selective Licensing Policy Cabinet decision.

Report from the Strategic Director of Regeneration and Environment.

Recommendations: That Cabinet:

1.    Review all options proposed in section 3 of the report and approve Option 3, which is to proceed to approve Selective Licensing declarations, including the establishment of a stakeholder steering group (based on the criteria set out within the report and appendices);

2.    Approve the revised Licence Fee and the Licence Conditions, in all of the proposed areas which are:

a.    Town centre / Eastwood / East Dene / Clifton / Boston Castle

b.    Masbrough / Kimberworth

c.     Thurcroft

d.    Dinnington

e.    Brinsworth

f.      Parkgate

In relation to this item, Councillor Tinsley declared that he had previously held a licence in Maltby. It was not a financial interest.

Councillor Yasseen expressed her gratitude for the opportunity to present the call-in, noting that raising housing standards across Rotherham was a shared priority. It was stated that while the principle was supported and had been backed over the past 10 years, Councillor Yasseen did not support the current proposal. Concerns were raised that the model would not deliver lasting change, as similar issues persisted in the same streets after a decade. The procedural, legal, and policy concerns were highlighted, including flaws in the consultation process, inadequate responses during engagement events, and anomalies such as reopening the consultation and rebranding it as “landlord licensing,” which it was believed was inconsistent with the Housing Act. Evidence-based feedback had previously been submitted, including examples of inaccuracies on the council’s website and maps.

Councillor Yasseen stated that the consultation process had undermined trust and integrity, describing aspects as misleading. Concerns were reiterated about the equality analysis, noting that it lacked evidence of mitigating measures for disproportionate impacts on protected groups. Reference was made to central Rotherham areas, Boston Castle, Wath East, and Wath West, where engagement events were held and which have high ethnic diversity. Additional concerns included inadequate data on mobility and immigration markers under the Housing Act, particularly the mobility index, and a lack of transparency regarding alternative schemes submitted during consultation.

In continuation Councillor Yasseen cited Little London in Maltby as an example, noting it had previously been identified for improvement, fined, and featured on a national programme for poor housing conditions, yet was removed from the proposed selective licensing scope. Questions were raised about the basis for accepting or rejecting schemes and concerns expressed about transparency, as residents perceived possible preferential treatment of landlords. It was emphasised that the call-in focused on tenants’ rights to safe, secure, and decent homes, which they felt had not been achieved over the past decade. They argued that the proposed model risked duplicating regulation given the forthcoming Renters Reform Bill and Awaab’s Law and suggested waiting for these measures to be implemented. A borough-wide scheme, similar to Barnsley’s approach, was strongly supported as an alternative to selective licensing.

Councillor Yasseen went on to raise concerns about the financial model, noting that over 300 properties had been removed from the selective licensing scope without clear rationale and questioning how this affected projected income from licence fees. Clarification was sought on whether any deficit had been accounted for and whether funding was ring-fenced for the dedicated team. It was queried how tenant involvement would be strengthened, expressing doubt based on previous poor engagement outcomes and a lack of significant changes in approach. Finally, concerns were reiterated about transparency in property removals, with assurances requested that decisions were not influenced by lobbying.

Councillor A Carter confirmed agreement with previously stated reasons for the call-in and requested either a revision of the decision or, at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

To consider the Board’s Work Programme.

The Governance Manager noted that work programme was presented in the report. She highlighted that follow-up on life-saving equipment and related by-laws remained a priority. She also confirmed that discussions were ongoing with the Rotherham Youth Cabinet regarding topics and timing for the Children’s Commissioners Takeover Challenge, which would be scheduled into the work programme.

Councillor Yasseen recalled that, following a recommendation from the Youth Cabinet a few years ago, the plastic cups were replaced with paper cups at the Town Hall. They advised ensuring this commitment was upheld, as the Youth Cabinet might comment on it during their visit.

Resolved: - That the Work Programme be approved.

To receive updates from the Chairs of the Select Commission on work undertaken and planned for the future.

Improving Places Select Commission Update:

Councillor McKiernan, Chair of Improving Places Select Commission reported that the previous meeting on 21 October covered the Housing Strategy 2025–2030 and its Draft Action Plan, which will monitor progress under four key priorities. Performance would be measured annually (April–March), with progress reports presented each July. Members also received information on the Pride in Place programme for central Rotherham (2025–2035), formerly the Neighbourhood Plan, and on the council’s regeneration strategy and funding approach. The council prioritises projects first and then seeks funding, rather than waiting for government funds.

Updates were provided on the Neighbourhood Board, due at Cabinet on 17 November, and on future plans for the East area.

Additional work programme items included the School Road Safety Review, with follow-up meetings arranged; an antisocial behaviour workshop scheduled for 4 December at the Town Hall; and plans for a market library redevelopment site visit.

The next meeting on 16 December would consider the Bereavement Services Annual Report and the Thriving Neighbourhoods Annual Report.

Health Select Commission Update:

Councillor Keenen, Chair of Health Select Commission noted that the next meeting on 20 November would scrutinise the Mental Health Strategy (pre-decision), Place Partners winter planning, and the Health and Wellbeing annual report.

An unpaid carers’ strategy workshop was scheduled for 28 November in conjunction with Improving Lives. Feedback was provided on the Access to Contraception review, which was thorough and aimed for Cabinet consideration before the end of the municipal year. Findings from the Menopause Workshop would be reported after the contraception review, with both pieces of work showing complementary themes. Plans were underway for a site visit to the Same Day Emergency Care facility at Rotherham Hospital, alongside potential visits to the lung clinic in early 2026, ahead of items coming to Health Select in March.

Attendance at the Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 21 October was reported, where views were shared on consultation findings regarding proposed commissioning changes for gluten-free prescribing and IVF. High engagement from Rotherham residents provided reassurance their views were considered. Additionally, with Barnsley Council’s support, stroke emergency care and aftercare pathways were successfully added to the work programme following residents’ concerns.

Improving Lives Select Commission:

Councillor Brent, Acting Chair of Improving Lives Select Commission noted that Members had received updates on the Home to Children and Care Leavers Sufficiency Strategy (2023–2028) and the draft SEND Sufficiency Strategy, both of which were positively received.

The December meeting would include updates on responses to Prevention of Future Deaths reports and the Rotherham Safeguarding Children Partnership Annual Assurance Report.

Members of ILSC were invited to a November workshop on the Child and Unpaid Carers’ Strategy for pre-decision scrutiny ahead of Cabinet consideration.

To review and identify items for pre-decision scrutiny from the Forward Plan of Key Decisions.

Link to: Browse plans - Forward Plan of Key Decisions, 2025 - Rotherham Council

The Board considered the Forward Plan of Key Decisions November 2025 to January 2026.

The Governance Manager noted that the December meeting would include the HRA Business Plan and rent setting for 2026–2027, the Rotherham Employment and Skills Strategy (pre-decision), and the Safer Rotherham Partnership Annual Report.

Items on the forward plan included the Unpaid Carers Strategy (2026–2031), Adult Social Care Charging Policy, Housing First Recommissioning, Care Leaver Offer and Charter, Inclusion Strategy Annual Report (formerly Equalities and Diversity Inclusion Strategy), the Local Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Fund, and the Library Strategy. Non-key decisions included updates on the Adult Social Care Mental Health Strategy and Housing Repairs and Maintenance.

Suggested items for consideration by OSMB were the Adult Social Care Charging Policy, Inclusion Strategy, and Library Strategy. Members agreed to review and provide feedback following further discussion.

Resolved: That the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board:

1. Agreed that the following items would be added to the December agenda as part of OSMB’s pre-decision scrutiny work:

·       Rotherham Employment & Skills Strategy - Pre-decision scrutiny.

·       Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Plan, Rent Setting and Service Charges 2026- 27 – Pre-decision scrutiny.

·       Inclusion Strategy and Annual Report – Pre-decision scrutiny.

·       Library Strategy – Pre-decision scrutiny.

As part of their role the Chair and Vice Chair of OSMB are appointed to the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority (MCA) Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The Chair of OSMB is the Vice Chair on this committee.  

This committee holds the MCA to account and ensure that all aspects of the decision-making process are transparent, inclusive and fair.   The Committee are responsible for checking that the MCA is delivering its objectives and that the decisions made in policies, strategies and plans have been made in the best interests of the residents and workers of South Yorkshire.

The published agenda packs and minutes can be accessed via: South Yorkshire MCA.

Members who have comments and queries regarding any item on any agenda should refer this to the Chair of OSMB and the Governance Manager at the earliest opportunity to ensure they’re reflected in debate during the relevant public meeting.

The Chair reported that there was nothing to update from the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority, as no formal meeting had taken place. An informal update on bus services had been received.

To determine any item which the Chair is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency.

There were no urgent items.