Issue - meetings

Report number CEX361 by the Chief Executive.                 [Enclosure]

DECISION:

1.                  That the Council receives and notes the result of the tenants’ ballot.

2.                  That the Council requests the Government to reform the housing subsidy system to enable all of the money raised locally to be retained locally, thus enabling the expressed wishes of our tenants to be delivered in the long term.

3.                  That in partnership with the Tenants Working Group and the existing staff focus group, a working party of the Community Development and Scrutiny Panel advise the Cabinet on the potential for exploring more innovative options for the management of the Council’s housing stock.

The Council had before them report number CEX361 by the Chief Executive on the outcome of the ballot of tenants on Large Scale Voluntary Transfer (LSVT). The report followed the ballot where 73.2% of the District Council’s tenants voted against the transfer of the housing stock to South Lincolnshire Homes, which was created as the proposed Registered Social Landlord (RSL). The report explained the Council’s position following the ballot and provided projected figures for the cost of required improvements to the housing stock.

The Organisational Development and Housing Services Portfolio Holder moved the recommendations in report CEX361 and stated that she was pleased with the turnout for the ballot. She considered that the high turnout proved that tenants had been fully engaged. There had been some disappointment among staff members in Housing Services, who recognised that the transfer could have provided better service for tenants. The motion was seconded.

An amendment to 2.3 was proposed and seconded:

“That in partnership with the Tenants’ Working Group and the existing staff focus group a working party of substantive members of the Community Development and Scrutiny Panel (DSP) advise the Cabinet on the potential for exploring more innovative options for the management of the Council’s housing stock.”

At the meeting of the Community DSP held on 22^nd November 2006, a working group was provisionally appointed. One member appointed to the working group had sat on the DSP as a substitute member. It was suggested that there would be greater accountability if members appointed to the working group were substantive members of the DSP.

In seconding the amendment, it was suggested that the working group should be cross-party and new groups of tenants should be considered. There were concerns that the tenants who had been part of the Stock Option Appraisal and LSVT process were not wholly representative and had pre-determined conceptions.

Debate ensued over the right of the Council to prescribe who sat on DSP working groups. Under scrutiny arrangements any member was entitled to sit on a working group, even if they were not a substantive member of the DSP. As there was a lack of volunteers from the Community DSP, several Members agreed that the place on the working group could be filled by any councillor prepared to attend. A number of members concurred that the Council should not be prescriptive over the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93