Agenda item

Stock Options Appraisal Update

Report of the Corporate Director of Regeneration and Economic Development – presented by Marie Roe, Housing Stock Option Manager, Durham County Council.

 

Minutes:

The Chair introduced the Stock Option Appraisal Project Manager, Marie Roe who was in attendance to give Members an update on the Housing Stock Options Appraisal (SOA) Project. 

 

The SOA Project Manager referred Members to the update report within the agenda papers and that, since the last update to the Committee in July, further consultation had been conducted with Tenants; staff from DCC; the two Arms-Length Management Organisations (ALMOs), Dale and Valley Homes (DVH) and East Durham Homes (EDH), together with the in-house provider Durham City Homes (DCH); those organisations’ Board Members; Elected Members; and other local partners.

 

Members were asked to recall the Communication and Consultation Strategy and the Tenant Empowerment Statement, with a consequence being the appointment of the Independent Tenant Adviser to offer impartial advice.  The Committee were reminded of the various seminars and events held with Tenants’ and Residents’ Associations and that the vision with 8 objectives had been agreed and prioritised and that this had shaped the SOA process. 

 

The SOA Project Manager explained that the key issues raised through the consultation process had included:

 

·        The continued delivery and maintenance of improvement programmes and more investment in the improvement and diversification of services, concerns in relation to Welfare Reform

·        Preservation of trusted brands, a strong sense of local identity with DVH, DCH and EDH

·        The Council needs to consider the implications for the whole of the housing stock when identifying the option

·        A desire for the quality of neighbourhoods and local services to match that of the housing provision

 

The SOA Project Manager noted that all stakeholders consulted had commented that a “whole stock” option was preferable as long as it was fair and equitable for all.  It was added that stakeholders concerns about the implications of transfer to an existing Registered Providers varied from a loss of employment security and the removal of local accountability structures to the redirection of much needed investment from County Durham to other areas of the Country.

 

Members were reminded that the SOA Project was not just about “basic” housing need; it encompassed regeneration issues, implications of Welfare Reform and was an opportunity to decide upon how County Durham would be in the future.  Councillors noted that the work undertaken had been inclusive and conducted such that the decision making was made transparent and open.  The SOA Project Manager added that the final report regarding the SOA Project would be going to the meeting of Cabinet on 12 December 2012 and that the she would return to a meeting of the Committee early in the new year to update Members on the process going forward from there, with information on project plans for implementation and so on.

Councillor M Wilkes asked whether there was over-repetition of updates relating to the SOA project, with many seminars and reporting back of issues to other Scrutiny Committees.  The SOA Project Manager noted that this Committee was the only Committee that was reported back to in terms of the SOA Project and that the other seminars and events were either as part of the consultation exercise or to keep all Elected Members up-to-date.  Councillor M Wilkes noted that the “Human Rights” section of Appendix 1 setting out implications said none and added that perhaps this should have a comment as regards issues such as Anti-Social Behaviour.  The SOA Project Manager noted that in relation to the SOA report going to Cabinet, the implications appendix would be looked at, with advice being sought from the Head of Legal and Democratic Services.

 

Resolved:

 

(i)                 That the update report be noted.

(i)                 That the Economy and Enterprise Overview and Scrutiny Committee   receive a further update report at a future meeting of the Committee.

 

Supporting documents: