Issue - meetings

Cabinet considered proposals for accelerated temporary accommodation provision for the district. This item, alongside the general housing acquisition programme, was probably the most important item ever presented to Cabinet by the Portfolio Holder for Housing. Cabinet wanted to bring home those local residents who had been placed in temporary accommodation outside the district. There currently were 303 households in temporary accommodation, both due to long term central underfunding of social housing and local pressures relating to gentrification and rent inflation. A hundred and fifty seven of these households were placed outside Thanet, due to the unavailability of rental properties within Thanet.

Households that were placed out of the local area existed under extreme pressure. They risk losing jobs, school places, support networks, and known health professionals. They incurred extra expenses and suffered isolation and worsening of mental health at a time when their mental health was already under extreme strain due to becoming homeless. Cabinet had made active efforts to reduce these pressures, including working to make provision for funding for transport back to school places and jobs through the Household Support Fund. However, these efforts could not fully address the key issue. Cabinet was therefore asked through these proposals to approve the purchase of 170 homes for temporary accommodation, for the explicit purpose of bringing home households who were currently placed out of the local area, and to keep households in Thanet in the future. This was a plan that was huge in significance and scope; but it was also another project that continued the Council’s tradition in Housing of creating a virtuous circle, where both social and financial needs were addressed.

The social, emotional, and financial strain for Thanet residents of being placed outside Thanet is enormous. It was damaging for families and individuals, places strain on education placements and the management of health conditions, and this is why the Portfolio Holder for Housing had long argued for investment in in-house, local temporary accommodation. This was a priority for the current Cabinet before the incumbents became the administration. Cabinet was now in a position to ensure that the Council provided this level of support for residents, and grow the in-house provision, to ensure social and financial stability.

The costs of out of area and external placements were financial as well as social, as demonstrated by the fact that an investment of this scale would stand to save £114,000 in the first year alone, with over £1,000,000 per year saved by year ten. In 2023/24, the council's general fund incurred a £1.2 million net overspend due to the costs of temporary accommodation. Predicting the 2024/25 net overspend was challenging due to the fact that the need for temporary accommodation was based on demand but was currently predicted to exceed the £800,000. Temporary accommodation is not delivered within the Housing Revenue Account, and as such the costs for it come directly from our General Fund, which had an impact on the delivery of other Council services.

Through continuing acquisition, the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 78

Report to follow

Ashley Jackson introduced the report and made the following comments:

·  Overview and Scrutiny Panel was asked to consider and comment on the contents of the report and the recommendations to Cabinet;

·  Thanet District Council had a duty to provide temporary accommodation to people who were eligible for assistance, homeless and in priority need. The demand for temporary accommodation had increased consistently since 2012 and this had been replicated across the country;

·  The rapid increase in people presenting as homeless and in need of TA had played a substantial part on the increasing pressure on local authorities;

·  The Council’s budget for TA in 2024/25 was £1,005,860, offset by a budgeted income of £350,000 from Housing Benefit and rent;

·  These budgets had been significantly exceeded, due to the demand for TA and the net overspend across all Housing Options budgets in 2023/24 was £1.3m and this was forecast to be £800k in 2024/25.

·  The Council was currently accommodating 303 households in temporary accommodation, just under 170 of those were in other parts of Kent, hence the proposal to purchase 170 units of temporary accommodation within Thanet;

·  The business model was explained in detail in the report and officers had developed a toolkit to assess viability. To be viable, temporary accommodation schemes needed to show a saving almost immediately to prevent an impact on the Council’s general fund budget position;

·  In summary to ensure that this programme was financially viable, and a lower cost than the Council’s current temporary accommodation arrangements residents would be charged a social rent and a service charge;

·  The recommendations to Cabinet were that:

1.  The council progresses with a programme to acquire or develop up to 170 homes for use as temporary accommodation;

2.  Cabinet recommend the required general fund capital budget of £38.762m as part of the annual budget setting process across the financial years 2025/26 and 2026/27;

3.  A six monthly update on the delivery of the programme is provided to Cabinet;

4.  The letting of these homes will be in accordance with the Council’s Temporary Accommodation Policy, approved by Cabinet in July 2024.

Members asked questions and made comments as follows:

·  Finance reported an overspend of £800k. At the moment there were a lot of households in temporary accommodation and that if number dropped, would that expose the Council?

·  Why had temporary accommodation become an issue?

·  Were these properties being developed and or purchased by the Council as temporary accommodation exempt from rent to buy?

·  The government was looking into the issue of temporary accommodation across the country. This scheme being proposed by the Council seemed to stand on its own merit;

·  What were the pressures on the General Fund? It would help make clear recommendations if such financial pressures were made known to the Panel;

·  Members fully supported these proposals, considering that some major housing developments were struggling to reach the 30% affordable housing requirement;

·  The new properties to be purchased would help manage the human costs where some households would find themselves in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 72