Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

In accordance with the local Code of Conduct, a councillor is required to disclose at the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) that they may have in respect of any matter for consideration on this agenda.  Any councillor with a DPI must notparticipate in any discussion or vote regarding that matter and they must also withdraw from the meeting immediately before consideration of the matter.

If that DPI has not been registered, the councillor must notify the Monitoring Officer of the details of the DPI within 28 days of the date of the meeting.

Councillors are further invited to disclose any non-pecuniary interest which may be relevant to any matter on this agenda, in the interests of transparency, and to confirm that it will not affect their objectivity in relation to that matter.

There were no declarations of interest.

There were no declarations of interest.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Executive held on [date].

The minutes of the meeting held on 22 September 2020 were confirmed as a correct record.  The Chairman signed the minutes.

The minutes of the meeting held on 22 September 2020 were confirmed as a correct record.  The Chairman signed the minutes.

The Leader informed the meeting that the Mayor, Councillor Richard Billington had left hospital on Monday, that his operation had gone well and that he was now at home where he would continue his recovery from what had been serious surgery.  The Mayor and Mayoress were very grateful for all the messages of support they had received.

The Leader commented that the issue of child hunger during school holidays had rightly dominated the news over the past few days.  He noted that in Guildford Borough there would be children who, without support, could go without meals that would be normally provided at schools.

However, the Leader observed that we were fortunate in Guildford because the community had stood up along with local businesses to work with this Council to combat food poverty.  The Council had continued to provide food parcels to the most vulnerable even after Central Government funding for this ceased during the summer. The Council would extend this support by coordination with its community services team to ensure that families with children at home continued to receive the support they needed.  The Council’s efforts had been complimented by its partnership with voluntary organisations, the private sector, and the schools themselves.  The Leader thanked everyone that had offered help, including the University, Kings School, Foodwise, Stoke Community Support, The Ash, Ash Vale and Ash Green Coronavirus Support Group as well as Mandira’s Kitchen donating 250 meals, Pho Restaurant and Love Brownies in Tunsgate offering packed lunches and the Bench Bar at the Sports Park providing hot meals, together with many others.  The Leader was investigating setting up a Civic accreditation such that those that had given selflessly throughout the crisis were recognised officially.

The Leader observed there had been much talk about the amount of financial support that came from Westminster including the tranche of £100,000 that had been announced in the previous week.  In consideration, the Leader set out the Council’s latest estimates for the impact of COVID to its finances and the support it had received.

For the full year it was estimated that the pandemic would have caused £4.5 million in extra expenditure. Principally, this covered looking after the homeless, the cost of providing personal protective equipment (PPE) and subsidising the Council’s leisure facilities.  The Leader estimated lower incomes of £8.2 million which in the most part was loss of parking income, but also represented reduced income from sports and community facilities.  The total impact to the Council’s budget was £12.7 million.  So far, the Council had received a total of £1.9 million from Central Government, leaving a shortfall of £10.8 million.  The Leader explained the Council might expect to receive a further £5 million through the Sales, Fees and Charges scheme whereby the Council was compensated for around 70% of some of its revenues; however, the claims submitted were still being assessed.  The best possible scenario for the Council was to have to fund £5.8 million from reserves. 

The Leader noted the forecast a gap  ...  view the full decision text for item EX47

The Leader informed the meeting that the Mayor, Councillor Richard Billington had left hospital on Monday, that his operation had gone well and that he was now at home where he would continue his recovery from what had been serious surgery.  The Mayor and Mayoress were very grateful for all the messages of support they had received.

The Leader commented that the issue of child hunger during school holidays had rightly dominated the news over the past few days.  He noted that in Guildford Borough there would be children who, without support, could go without meals that would be normally provided at schools.

However, the Leader observed that we were fortunate in Guildford because the community had stood up along with local businesses to work with this Council to combat food poverty.  The Council had continued to provide food parcels to the most vulnerable even after Central Government funding for this ceased during the summer. The Council would extend this support by coordination with its community services team to ensure that families with children at home continued to receive the support they needed.  The Council’s efforts had been complimented by its partnership with voluntary organisations, the private sector, and the schools themselves.  The Leader thanked everyone that had offered help, including the University, Kings School, Foodwise, Stoke Community Support, The Ash, Ash Vale and Ash Green Coronavirus Support Group as well as Mandira’s Kitchen donating 250 meals, Pho Restaurant and Love Brownies in Tunsgate offering packed lunches and the Bench Bar at the Sports Park providing hot meals, together with many others.  The Leader was investigating setting up a Civic accreditation such that those that had given selflessly throughout the crisis were recognised officially.

The Leader observed there had been much talk about the amount of financial support that came from Westminster including the tranche of £100,000 that had been announced in the previous week.  In consideration, the Leader set out the Council’s latest estimates for the impact of COVID to its finances and the support it had received.

For the full year it was estimated that the pandemic would have caused £4.5 million in extra expenditure. Principally, this covered looking after the homeless, the cost of providing personal protective equipment (PPE) and subsidising the Council’s leisure facilities.  The Leader estimated lower incomes of £8.2 million which in the most part was loss of parking income, but also represented reduced income from sports and community facilities.  The total impact to the Council’s budget was £12.7 million.  So far, the Council had received a total of £1.9 million from Central Government, leaving a shortfall of £10.8 million.  The Leader explained the Council might expect to receive a further £5 million through the Sales, Fees and Charges scheme whereby the Council was compensated for around 70% of some of its revenues; however, the claims submitted were still being assessed.  The best possible scenario for the Council was to have to fund £5.8 million from reserves. 

The Leader noted the forecast a gap  ...  view the full minutes text for item EX47

Decision:

To adopt the revised Tenancy Strategy.

Reasons:

1.    There is a legal requirement under the Localism Act 2011 for the Council to prepare and publish a tenancy strategy and to review that strategy periodically, which this report addresses. In line with this statutory requirement, all of the social landlords operating in Guildford must consider the Council’s over-arching strategy, as set out in the appendices to this report, which has been circulated as a consultation document to each social landlord operating in the Borough, as well as being available online for all stakeholders.

2.    Flexible and other tenancies assist as tools in the efficient management of social housing stock in Guildford, which is valued by the Council’s social landlord services’ function and other social landlords operating in the borough.

Other options considered and rejected by the Executive

None.

Details of any conflict of interest declared by the Leader or lead councillors and any dispensation granted:

None

The Executive considered a report setting out the requirement for the Council to have a tenancy strategy and appended a revised strategy for adoption. Under the Localism Act 2011 (s.150), the Council had a duty to prepare and publish a tenancy strategy, which should be periodically reviewed.  The Council had published a tenancy strategy in 2013 that now required review.  The revised strategy had set out how the Council would determine the type and length of tenancies to be offered to social tenants in the Borough. There was a high demand for social housing across the Borough and the Council was the biggest landlord. It was noted that the highest levels of family deprivation in Surrey were to be found in parts of Guildford. Other social landlords (Registered Providers or housing associations) that operated in Guildford would have regard to the Strategy.

The Lead Councillor for Housing and Development Control introduced the report and noted that the landscape of social housing was changing and that it would be necessary to review the Tenancy Strategy more regularly to ensure it was up to date with policy and best practice.

The report included comments from the Community Executive Advisory Board (EAB) arising from the meeting held on 10 September 2020. The Vice Chairman of the EAB endorsed the comments at the meeting.

Having considered the report and the comments of the EAB, the Executive

RESOLVED: That the revised Tenancy Strategy be adopted

Reasons:

1.    There is a legal requirement under the Localism Act 2011 for the Council to prepare and publish a tenancy strategy and to review that strategy periodically, which this report addresses. In line with this statutory requirement, all of the social landlords operating in Guildford must consider the Council’s over-arching strategy, as set out in the appendices to this report, which has been circulated as a consultation document to each social landlord operating in the Borough, as well as being available online for all stakeholders.

2.    Flexible and other tenancies assist as tools in the efficient management of social housing stock in Guildford, which is valued by the Council’s social landlord services’ function and other social landlords operating in the borough.

Decision:

To adopt Option 2 - Continue to offer a contracted-out Pest Control treatment service but introduce charges for rodent treatments with a 100% concession for users in receipt of qualifying benefits.

Reason:

In order to ensure the Council had fully considered recommendations for introducing charges for rats and mice treatments for residents.

Other options that were considered and rejected by the Executive

Option 1 - Continue to offer a contracted-out Pest Control treatment service with free rodent treatments for all residents in the Borough.

Option 3 – Continue to offer a contracted-out Pest Control treatment service but introduce charges for all pest control services including rodent treatments without any concessions.

Option 4 – Discontinue the pest control treatment service at the end of the current contract on 30 June 2021.

Details of any conflict of interest declared by the Leader or lead councillors and any dispensation granted:

None

The Executive considered a report that set out the existing service provision for rodent (mice and rat) pest control treatments provided by the Council. The report proposed a number of options for introducing a charge for the delivery of rodent control treatments which would enable the Executive to make a decision about future service provision.

The Lead Councillor for Environment introduced the report and spoke in support of Option 2. It was noted that the Council provided a high standard of service to residents, but that it was also essential in the current financial climate to consider where savings could be made. It was recommended that a charge should be introduced for rat and mice control treatments but that there should be no charge for those residents in receipt of qualifying benefits. The charge would provide £135,000 saving to the Housing Revenue Account.

Consideration of the report by the Community Executive Advisory Board on 10 September had resulted in an update of the list of qualifying benefits.  The EAB’s comments and recommendations were set out the report.  The Vice Chairman of the EAB attended the Executive meeting and explained that discussion of this topic had raised a number of concerns including the implications of a possible change to the structure of local authorities in the County. Ultimately, the EAB had been most concerned about the implications of the non-reporting of infestations should a charge be levied across the board.  The Vice-Chairman, whilst happy to support Option 2, reiterated the EAB’s preferred option of continuing the contract for a further 12 months, or Option 1.

Having considered the report and the EAB’s comments and recommendations, the Executive

RESOLVED:  That Option 2: To continue to offer a contracted-out Pest Control treatment service but introduce charges for rodent treatments with a 100% concession for users in receipt of qualifying benefits, be adopted.

Reason:

In order to ensure the Council had fully considered recommendations for introducing charges for rats and mice treatments for residents.