Agenda item

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 temporary accommodation being placed outside the district;

·  Bringing back families who had been placed outside the district was something the Council needed to consider. Such schemes as this would go a long way to achieving this;

·  This project was asset based. It had far reaching impact on the welfare, mental health and financial wellbeing of residents;

·  This would enable households to get stability to their lives;

·  One hundred and seventy properties was a specific figure. Had the Council identified such properties?

·  Where in Thanet would the 170 properties be?

·  It had always been difficult to convince developers to build one bedroom properties. Could the Council engage developers in this discussion for 1 bed properties?

·  The Panel needed to make recommendations to manage risk.

Ashley Jackson, Bob Porter, Director of Place and Chris Blundell, Director of Corporate Services & S151 Officer responded to member questions and comments as follows:

·  The Council had made an investment in a resalable asset;

·  Housing had gone up in value. There was a risk that prices for housing could go down;

·  This programme was different to the Housing Revenue Account (HRA);

·  This programme would not be able to cover its own costs. However it was cheaper than what the Council was currently doing;

·  These proposals would save money;

·  If the Council did not need these properties in the near future, it could sell them at market value and cover other developments;

·  The second option was to move these properties into the HRA housing stock. However that would work if the HRA could be seen as sustainable;

·  The third option would be to establish a housing company and charge a rent higher than was currently being charged for the Council’s other housing stock;

·  There had been a spike in the last two to three years in demand for temporary accommodation resulting from the rentals in the private sector that had been increased. Landlords in the private sector had served notices to households in order to let to someone else who had a higher rent offer;

·  CiPFA was commissioned to give advice on these schemes;

·  These properties were exempt from the rent to buy scheme;

·  These schemes would be considered as key decisions and would be would be presented to Cabinet for decision;

·  Each of the schemes would be pre decision scrutiny by the Overview and Scrutiny Panel before being taken to Cabinet for final decision;

·  There was a degree of risk to consider. As the schemes developed, officers would be looking at the performance through a review of the medium term financial strategy;

·  The 170 properties would be smaller units spread across the district. Officers would be looking at central locations to identify sites for the location of these properties;

·  Officers hold discussions with developers on unit sizes to see if any developments could include 1 bedroom units.

Councillor Scobie proposed, Councillor Packman seconded and Members made the following recommendation to Cabinet, that:

1.  The Overview and Scrutiny Panel supports the decision which will provide much needed temporary accommodation for Thanet residents in Thanet whilst reducing pressure on the Council finances.

2.  To forward to Cabinet the officer recommendations in the report.