Agenda item

Presentation by Paul Davies, Chief Executive and Lawrence Boyd, Chair of the Board – Cheltenham Borough Homes

The Chair welcomed Paul Davies and Lawrence Boyd.

Paul Davies, the Chief Executive and Lawrence Boyd, Chair of the Board of Cheltenham Borough Homes (CBH) introduced themselves and a PowerPoint presentation (Appendix 1).

Lawrence explained that he had been Chair of the Board for the last 18 months and had only 18 months of his 9 year term remaining. 

Looking retrospectively over the last decade he felt CBH had performed well, a major factor was the Decent Homes programme, however, this success was also attributed to the Board, Staff and the support provided by the Council. 

Going forward things would be very different, the current undertaking of building new homes and the harsh economy would add pressure to CBH and its Board, which was currently comprised of 15 non-executive members, 5 tenants, 5 independent members and 5 Council representatives. 

The direction of travel being proposed offered scope to reduce the Board to 12 non-executive members (4 tenants, 4 independent members and 4 Council representatives), though this was still for discussion.  External factors included, generally Board sizes were reducing and industry research suggested that a smaller Board was a more effective Board.  Internal factors being, that creating a team within the Board structure with the current number (15) was more difficult, a smaller number (12) would allow for improved engagement and enable more focus from individuals.  He did not agree with the argument that this would affect quality. 

Personally he wanted to see the change through the passing of time as members came to the end of their 9 year term, as he would next year and one of the tenant representatives the year after (2013). 

Paul Davies then spoke about the development of the business plan. 

Members were shown a map which depicted the distribution of Council housing stock and areas of deprivation in Cheltenham.  The majority of homes managed by CBH were situated within the most deprived communities in the borough, with higher unemployment, lower incomes, poorer health and mortality 4 to 7 years less than the equivalent. 

From the outset CBH were not only committed to delivering a successful Decent Homes programme but also providing positive outcomes for their customers.  Having consulted 1 in 5 residents, as well as various regeneration partners, it was apparent that there was a strong feeling that CBH should be more than a management and repairs provider and build upon its development of communities. 

There was however, still ambiguity in the operating environment and therefore, targets and milestones within the business plan covered the period of 2012-2015.  The economic climate made CBH residents more vulnerable and growth within the housing market was an issue.  Major welfare changes, too many to mention, posed their own risks to CBH and their residents.

Regulatory reforms had and would see all but the HCA disappear.  Delivering a 3 star service had always been the key driver for CBH and with the demise of the Audit Commission came the requirement to monitor themselves and be more accountable to the community.

There were also opportunities.  CBH was comfortable standing as a partner of the Council, happy to help deliver the Councils objectives whilst meeting their own. 

Forthcoming changes from housing subsidy to a self financing model also offered opportunities for CBH.  Whilst they would have a £58million debt, it was more than capable of serving that debt, with the regeneration works achieving £20million alone.  These changes offered potential for provision of new services for the community. 

Another issue faced by CBH was the proposed use of fixed term tenancies, ranging from a minimum of 2 to a maximum of 20 years (life in some circumstances).  In his opinion this could undermine efforts to create communities. 

Given the many uncertainties it was felt that it was time to hold to their current strategy.  The core business needed to be robust but CBH were eager to avoid being stagnant and would therefore look to draw in Lottery funding for future innovative projects and schemes.  The management fee from CBC would be maintained at the current level aided by a 3 year pay freeze for all employees and 110 new homes for 110 families would be completed within the coming 5 years.  

Paul Davies, the Chief Executive, took the opportunity to express his thanks to CBC for extending the management agreement until 2020, which offered an element of stability to residents in a time of uncertainty.

The following answers were given by the Chair of the Board and Chief Executive of CBH in response to questions from members of the committee;

• The Coronation Square office move was subject to the public agreeing to the Library being situated elsewhere.  If possible, a report would be considered by the Board at the end of May, though the process would probably take 12 months.  No cost saving would be achieved by this move, however, the building was more modern and accessible. 
• The CBH constitution states that the Board must be 5 tenants, 5 independent members and 5 CBC members.  Any change would need to be approved by Council. 
• CBH would look to utilise Officers with previous experience to liaise with particular providers rather than providing directly (mental health services). 
• Fixed term tenure would not apply retrospectively and would realistically take a generation to take effect.  Current guidance did not imply that authorities would be forced to offer fixed term tenure and as such the advice of CBH was that these should be used sparingly. 
• It would be for CBC to decide the criteria used to assess the length of tenure offered to a new tenant as the responsible authority for the Housing Policy. 

The Chair thanked both men for their attendance and members joined her in commending CBH in their successes over the last decade and exciting plans for the future.

The Chair referred members to the draft terms of reference for the Housing review member working group and invited members from the committee to express an interest in forming part of the working group. 

The Director of Commissioning confirmed that CBH Officers and Board Members would be co-opted and invited to participate at relevant times.  She envisaged that there would be one meeting a month between now and October, probably in the evening to suit members’ availability and there would be a large volume of reading involved between meetings. 

The Chair felt that, as the group was not a decision-making body, it would be beneficial for membership to be as diverse as possible. 

Councillors Coleman, Flynn, R. Hay and Waklett (CBH Board Member) and co-optee Karl Hemming expressed an interest. 

The Cabinet Member Housing and Safety would extend the invitation to all members and confirm details in due course.