Agenda and minutes

Any apologies for absence that have been received will be noted at this point.

Mrs Apel welcomed members of the public, and Ms Brown and Mr Morrisey from Hyde.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 2 July 2015.

Mr Budge asked that page four of the minutes be amended to show Mr Budge and Mr Hicks left after the first vote had taken place.

Mrs Keegan had requested by email that page four of the minutes be amended from:

‘Mrs Keegan assured Mrs Hamilton all options had been investigated’ to ‘Mrs Keegan replied that a joint venture option between Chichester District Council (CDC) and partner was requested at tender stage but no bids were received.’

Mrs Hamilton suggested the minutes provided a fair representation of what Mrs Keegan had said. The committee voted not to make Mrs Keegan’s amendment.

Mr Ransley commented on his concern that when the minutes of this committee address Council issues they lack any robustness in their recording. Mr Ransley looked forward to the Council adopting a process of audio or visual recording in the near future.

Mrs Jones provided the committee with the following update on the recommendations made at the last meeting:

·       The Overview and Scrutiny Committee (OSC) work programme was noted at Council on 14 July 2015

·       The first recommendation regarding Church Road was rescinded at Cabinet on 8 September 2015 with Cabinet agreed to proceed with the freehold disposal of the site to another party and once the sale was completed to consider using part of the receipt for affordable housing

·       The Homefinder Scheme was agreed at Cabinet on 7 July 2015

·       The Homelessness Strategy was agreed at Cabinet on 7 July 2015

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the OSC held on Thursday 2 July 2015 are approved as a correct record.

Accordingly, Mrs Apel signed and dated the official version of the minutes.

The Chairman will announce any urgent items that due to special circumstances are to be dealt with under the agenda item below relating to Late Items.

There were no urgent items.

Members and officers are reminded to make any declarations of disclosable pecuniary, personal and/or prejudicial interests they may have in respect of matters on the agenda for this meeting.

Mr Ransley declared a personal interest as part owner of a Hyde property. Mr Ransley clarified that his involvement in the discussion to follow would have no financial implication on this property.

The procedure for submitting public questions in writing no later than 12:00 on Monday 14 September 2015 is available upon request to Member Services (the contact details for which appear on the front page of this agenda).

A public question had been received from Mr A Chaplin. The Chairman decided to take this question under the next item.

The committee is requested to consider the findings of the Task and Finish Group and make recommendations accordingly.

Mrs Apel introduced the item explaining that the Hyde Review Task and Finish Group (TFG) had been set up following several complaints which had been received by Councillors about the increase in Hyde service charges.

Mrs Apel had received a copy of a letter from Carol Carter, Group Director of Housing at The Hyde Group (copy attached to the minutes) which she read out in full as requested.

Mrs Apel informed the committee that a newspaper article recently had included several statements allegedly made by a Councillor about Hyde. Mrs Apel confirmed that the statement alleged to have been made was not a reflection of any Council policy.

Mr Chaplin read his questions (referenced above).

A widely held view by Hyde tenants is that the increased service charges have been excessive and unreasonable.

What practical steps can be taken by Council to influence Hyde to review the excessive increases in service charges for hundreds of its tenants?

On the evidence given in the Task and Finish Group report, tenant scrutiny within Hyde appears to be ‘not fit for purpose’. Can the Council include this aspect in its further discussions with Hyde representatives?

Mrs Apel informed Mr Chaplin that this was the purpose of the TFG investigation and a response would be formulated as part of the committee’s deliberations.

Mr Shaxson as Chairman of the TFG then introduced his report and findings. He thanked the TFG members, officers, residents and Hyde representatives for their input to this review. He clarified that the ‘unsubstantiated’ comments (referenced in the second paragraph of Hyde’s letter above) were substantiated by the evidence received by the TFG.

Mr Shaxson drew attention to section 3.3 of the report. OSC became aware of the increased service charges in March/April 2015 and set up the TFG as soon as practically possible after the May 2015 elections.

Mr Shaxson emphasised the TFG terms of reference in section 4.3 of the report and how evidence had been gathered in section 5 of the report explaining that the TFG had examined discrepancies as well as increases both comparing from property to property as well as building to building.

Mr Shaxson listed the findings of the TFG as stated in section 10.1 of the report including the lack of a consultation process by Hyde prior to sending out invoice statements to residents effectively giving residents no prior warning.

Mr Ransley supported the recommendations of the report and requested that the scope of the review be extended to include further evidence if identified by the committee. Mr Ransley commented on the fact that some social rents were higher than affordable rents. Research carried out by Mr Dunmall had shown an example of a social rent of £93 per week plus £80 per week service charge for a one bed flat at Pilgrim Court compared to a one bed flat at Grainger House with an affordable rent of £133 per week including service charges. Mr Ransley asked if service charges were being used to artificially  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

Mr Ransley and Mr Cullen asked for clarification of the corporate priorities review process. Mr Over explained that the Council’s programme boards oversaw the large Corporate Plan projects and that creating new corporate priorities mid-year would require an increase in resources or a reduction of other priorities.

Mrs Jones explained that the TFG would assess progress against the Corporate Plan projects and indicators for the first six months of the current year and would ask relevant lead officers to attend to explain the risks of non-delivery where appropriate.

Mr Ransley asked if IT expenditure would be included following the end of the IT Advisory Group (ITAG). Mr Over explained that this was the role of the Business Improvement Project Board, however the TFG would review IT projects and make any relevant recommendations.

RESOLVED

That Mrs Dignum, Mr Galloway, Mrs Knightley and Mrs Plant are confirmed as members of this Task and Finish Group with Mrs Dignum as Chairman.

That the proposed scope and outline plan be approved.

Following the meeting Mr Morley also offered to serve on this group.

Consideration of any late items as follows:

a)     Items added to the agenda papers and made available for public inspection.

b)        Items which the Chairman has agreed should be taken as matters of urgency by reason of special circumstances reported at the meeting.

Mr Over informed the committee that the Novium review, scheduled for 15 March 2016, may be brought forward to 17 November 2015 following a discussion scheduled to take place with Cabinet on 30 October 2015.