Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Tom Spenser.

 (i)     To receive declarations of disclosable pecuniary and other interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.

(ii)     In accordance with the Officer Employment Procedure Rules, the Strategic Director - Corporate Resources, Kevin Foster, declares a disclosable personal interest (non-pecuniary) in any items concerning the companies of which he is a Council-appointed director.  The companies are listed in the attached schedule.  The interests are such that Mr Foster may advise on those items.

(iii)    In accordance with the Officer Employment Procedure Rules, the Head of Transformation, Digital and Customer Services, Adam Walther, declares a disclosable personal interest (non-pecuniary) in any items concerning the companies of which he is a Council-appointed director.  The companies are listed in the attached schedule.  The interests are such that Mr Walther may advise on those items.

The interests of the Strategic Director – Corporate Resources, Kevin, and the Head of Transformation, Digital and Customer, Adam Walther, were referred to in the agenda but it should be noted that neither were present at the meeting.

To approve the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 8 October 2024 as published.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting of the Communities and Housing Scrutiny Committee held on 8 October 2024 be approved and signed as a true and correct record.

To consider any business that the Chair rules may be dealt with under Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

There were no items of Urgent Business under Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

To review the Committee’s work programme, the draft Executive forward plan, and the recommendations and actions tracker.

The Chairman welcomed Members to the meeting, noting it was the Committee's first since the release of the Grant Thornton report, which highlighted significant issues in the scrutiny processes. Key points from the report included that senior leadership was not exposed to challenges or new ideas, there was a lack of curiosity from some Councillors, and there was limited evidence of effective use of scrutiny powers. These findings underscored the importance of robust scrutiny, and the Chairman encouraged the Committee to approach their discussions with a readiness to challenge and be challenged, ensuring transparency and openness. This was crucial for effective governance and achieving positive outcomes for Woking.

The Committee considered the Work Programme for the next meeting on 21 January 2024, which would cover Housing Complaints, the Housing Resident Engagement Strategy draft, and a Freedom Leisure Performance Review. No additional topics were raised for the Committee to consider.

The discussion then moved to the recommendations and actions tracker, specifically the resident survey. It was noted that the survey questions were set by the regulator of social housing, including the wording, length, answer options, and order of questions. This year, the survey would adhere strictly to the regulator's prescribed format to avoid the issues faced last year with an overly lengthy survey.

Katherine Hiscock explained that the survey would focus on the Tenant Satisfaction Measure (TSM) and be more user-friendly and accessible. The team had been working closely with the communications team to ensure compliance with the regulator's requirements. She mentioned the implementation of the Smart Survey system, which would allow digital distribution and better data analysis.

The meeting continued with the Chairman emphasising the importance of using data for analysis and insights. He stressed that improving data visibility within housing, including property and customer data, was crucial for making informed decisions. Katherine Hiscock reassured the Committee that data and analysis were central to her role and the housing transformation roadmap. She highlighted the importance of data in decision-making and service improvement. Following the TSM survey, an action plan would be developed to address key points from the survey, involving collaboration with various Council teams.

Following a question about data contributions from in-house teams and contractors like Mountjoy, Katherine Hiscock confirmed that Mountjoy, being co-located, meant that they could easily report concerns, and there was a proactive relationship for data sharing. Efforts were underway to integrate contractor data into the housing system for seamless data transfer and a single source of truth.

Craig Humphrey added that the ongoing stock condition survey would provide a detailed view of each property. He noted that the contractor had been proactive in identifying safeguarding and condition issues. Regular meetings ensured close engagement on exceptional cases.

Some Members raised concerns about collecting data from tenants with language barriers and those who were digitally excluded. Katherine Hiscock explained that multiple methods would be offered for survey collection, including digital and paper options. Tenants would be notified in advance, and support would be provided for those who  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Please refer to your electronic copy of the most recent Performance Management Report.

The challenges with Key Performanace Indicators (KPIs) were discussed, noting that many indicators did not exclusively represent the Council's performance but were influenced by external factors like the economy. For instance, the number of new households placed in B&B accommodation during the quarter was in part seen as a reflection of external circumstances beyond the Council's control. There was a significant push this year to set targets for KPIs. Setting these targets was deemed essential for aiming and measuring progress, with compliance targets, particularly in building safety, set at 100%, although achieving this might take time. It was suggested to include reasonable estimates in the narrative and it was agreed that Louise Strongitharm would take this action to look into whether there was a better way to do this.  

The discussion also touched onthe need for realistic targets, as setting unachievable ones rendered the red, amber, green rating system meaningless. Targets needed to be realistic and tied to achievable outcomes to effectively scrutinise performance. 

Additionally, it was noted thatsome indicators, like homelessness rates, were more about business intelligencethan performance indicators. These indicators were crucial for understandingthe broader implications on the Council's financial health and statutory duties. It was suggested that performance reports might evolve into performance and business intelligence reports to better reflect the organisation's overall health. The committee expressed willingness to support the process of updating indicators and ensuring targets were realistic and reflective of actual performance. There was an acknowledgment of the need for continuous tracking and updating of these indicators. 

The Committee raised concerns about the increase in housing complaints, which rose from seventeen in Q2 to Twenty-Four in Q4. Katherine Hiscock explained that the increase was due to a more proactive complaints management approach implemented in April 2024. 

Following a query regardingcomplaints, Katherine Hiscock clarified that Housing Services remained open until 5.00pm, and only Corporate Customer Services and Revenues and Benefits closed at 1.00pm. 

The Chairman suggested adetailed review of the data, including homelessness, living well, and housingcompliance. He proposed exploring the use of AI to handle routine inquiries andprovide immediate clarification. Katherine Hiscock commented that mostcontact was related to repairs, which was common for housing providers. She highlighted the Council's historical under-investment in digital capabilitiesand the ongoing efforts to improve systems and data. While AI was recognised asa useful tool, the Council was currently focused on establishing robust systems to support efficient work and better service access for residents and tenants.  

The Committee discussed the need for the website to be user-friendly and accessible. Katherine Hiscock explained that the council was redesigning the website with an external agency, involving council officers, residents, and tenants. The new website was expected to launch around February or March 2025. The Committee suggested promoting the web launch publicly within Wards to encourage usage and reduce calls, improving complaint accuracy and public perception.  

The Chairman raised concerns about the increasing number of householdsin emergency accommodation over  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Reporting Person: Louise Strongitharm

Before discussion began on the item, the Chairman extended his gratitude to the Housing team for their efforts in providing the requested HRA briefing sessions for Members.

Louise Strongitharm introduced the report and provided the Committee with an overview of the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) business plan, which was set to be considered by Council. The Committee were reminded that the HRA was a statutory landlord account, ring-fenced for expenditure related to tenants and housing stock. Following self-financing in 2012, an annual 30-year HRA business plan was required to outline expenditure priorities. 

In conclusion, the first version of the HRAbusiness plan showed a viable 30-year plan, emphasising the need to prioritise safety, building fabric, decent homes components, and decarbonisation in this order. The plan included minimising borrowing, maximising capital receipts, and disposing of underperforming assets. The Council needed to improve revenue performance by reducing costs and recovering service charges, using a combination of measures as recommended by consultants. 

The Chairman acknowledged that while Memberswere not technical experts, their role was to ask questions from a resident's perspective. The Chairman questioned what risk level the HRA Business planned posed. Councillor Ian Johnson, Portfolio Holder responded, noting that there was some risk, but that this risk was higher if the Council did not take action, as it would affect tenants' needs and regulatory compliance. Louise Strongitharm added that the document balanced financial risk with regulatory compliance and building safety. She emphasised that having a plan reduced risk by allowing for monitoring and prioritisation. The model presented could be adjusted quickly if government policies changed, further reducing risk. 

Following a question, Craig Humphrey clarified that extensive data analysis,including existing stock condition data, was part of the report. He emphasised the importance of maintaining a fluid businessplan to balance risks and ensure homes met decent standards. Craig Humphrey also explained that fire safety works would be instructed on a block-by-block basis. He noted that new fire risk assessments might identify additional items, but the overall number of fire safety works would gradually diminish. Craig Humphrey explained that housing providers typically conducted a full stock condition survey every five years, either all at once or through a rolling program. He assured the Committee that the previous survey data was reputable and not expected to show major shifts, though some adjustments might be necessary. Louise Strongitharm added that the plan aimed to determine an affordable level of borrowing for the HRA, with the 3.7% interest rate as a long-term average. The plan maintained a working balance over its life, allowing for flexibility as conditions changed. 

Following a question about any potential issues from the stock condition survey, Craig Humphrey responded that surveyors addressed health and safety issues as they arose, but it was too early to analyze the data. He suggested providing an update to the Committee once the surveys were concluded early next year. 

Members asked about theconsultation process for applying rent flexibility tore-lets, expressing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Reporting Person: Louise Strongitharm

Louise Strongitharm explained that the paper outlined the background leading to the decision to close and dispose of the Brockhill site. Unfortunately, over the past two years, Brockhill had fallen into disrepair and faced several issues, most notably around fire safety. Woking Borough Council had concluded that the building was effectively obsolete, and the level of investment required was unviable for a building of its age and size. Following a consultation, full Council unanimously resolved to close Brockhill on February 8, 2024. 

There was some suggestion that the decision to close Brockhill might have been different if the council had known about certain legacy recharge adjustments, implying a lack of funds. However, the report clarified that the decision was more about the viability of investing in a building that no longer met best practice standards for its age and size. 

Some Members questioned whether there had ever been a scheduled maintenance plan for Brockhill or if it had been neglected throughout its lifetime. Louise Strongitharm explained that Brockhill had undergone some internal works, with communal areas generally kept in good repair. However, the fabric of the building, including roof, windows, and doors, were nearing the end of their lifespans. Louise Strongitharm did not have the historic maintenance plan for the building available to advise the Committee.

The Chairman thanked Councillor Stephen Oades for calling in the decision to the Committee and invited him to speak on the item. Councillor Stephen Oades expressed his dissatisfaction with the report, stating that it did not fully capture the background and seemed disingenuous. He argued that claiming a building from the 1980s was obsolete was inaccurate. He highlighted that Brockhill had 48 flats and operated at full or near-full occupancy for over three decades, generating millions for the HRA account. Despite this, he claimed that virtually none of the money was spent on maintenance, with only minor internal investments.

Councillor S Oades criticized the neglect of both the building and its residents.  He mentioned that residents were promised compensation for heating failures in January 2023, but by October 2024, no one had received any compensation.

Louise Strongitharm responded, also addressing a point raised by Councillor Oades on the payback period and rents. She explained that paragraph 5.5 of the report detailed this. At the point of closure, if was fully occupied, the total rent and service charge for Brockhill was £540,000. However, she emphasised that rent and service charges covered various services, not just property maintenance.

Louise acknowledged that not all rent was available for building maintenance, as some covered the on-site support team. She noted that there would have been repairs, maintenance, compliance checks, and void works. Additionally, a large portion of the service charge, was for energy consumption. This was before accounting for other expenses like catering and usual tenant services. She pointed out that with a larger staff team, there was likely very little surplus for the capital program at Brockhill. Consequently, she believed the payback period would have been very  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.