Agenda and minutes

To consider any appeals in accordance with Procedure Rule 25* of the Access to Information Procedure Rules (in the event of an Appeal the press and public will be excluded).

(* In accordance with Procedure Rule 25, notice of an appeal must be received in writing by the Head of Governance Services at least 24 hours before the meeting).

There were no appeals.

1.  To highlight reports or appendices which officers have identified as containing exempt information, and where officers consider that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, for the reasons outlined in the report.

2.  To consider whether or not to accept the officers recommendation in respect of the above information.

3.  If so, to formally pass the following resolution:-

RESOLVED – That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following parts of the agenda designated as containing exempt information on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information, as follows:

No exempt items have been identified.

Members were informed that Appendix C to the Executive Board report had been designated as being exempt from publication under the provisions of Access to Information Procedure Rule 10.4 (3).

To identify items which have been admitted to the agenda by the Chair for consideration.

(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes.)

Supplementary information had been provided by the Director of Communities, Housing and Environment in relation to item 7, Future of Six High Rise and Resident Rehousing – Bailey and Brooklands Towers, Ramshead Heights, Leafield Towers, Raynville Court and Grange.  This information had been published and distributed prior to the meeting.

To disclose or draw attention to any interests in accordance with Leeds City Council’s ‘Councillor Code of Conduct’.

There were no late items.

To receive any apologies for absence and notification of substitutes.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors B Anderson (signatory to the Call-in), A Khan and Councillor A McCluskey.

Councillors C Anderson, K Brooks and E Thomson were in attendance as substitutes.

To consider a report from the Head of Democratic Services advising the Scrutiny Board on the procedural aspects of Calling In the decision.

The Head of Democratic Services submitted a report advising the Scrutiny Board on the procedural aspects of Calling In the decision.

Members were advised that the Call In is specific to the key decision in question, and issues outside of the decision, including other related decisions, were not to be considered as part of the Board’s decision regarding the outcome of the Call In.

Members were also advised that the options available to the Scrutiny Board in respect of this particular called in decision were as follows:

Option 1- Release the decision for implementation

Having reviewed this decision, the Scrutiny Board may decide to release it for implementation. If the Scrutiny Board chooses this option, the decision will be immediately released for implementation and the decision may not be called in again.

Option 2 - Recommend that the decision be reconsidered

The Scrutiny Board may decide to recommend to the decision maker that the decision be reconsidered. If the Scrutiny Board chooses this option a report will be submitted to the decision maker.

In the case of this officer decision, the report of the Scrutiny Board will be prepared within three working days of the Scrutiny Board meeting and submitted to the relevant Director.

In reconsidering the decision and associated Scrutiny Board report, the Director may vary the decision or confirm the original decision. In either case, this will form the basis of the final decision and will not be subject to any further Call In.

Failure to agree one of the above options

If the Scrutiny Board, for any reason, does not agree one of the above courses of action at this meeting, then Option 1 will be adopted by default, i.e. the decision will be released for implementation with no further recourse to Call In.

RESOLVED – That the report outlining the Call In procedures be noted.

To consider a report from the Head of Democratic Services, which presents background information relating to an Executive Board decision that has been ‘called in’ in accordance with procedures set out within the Council’s Constitution.

The original decision was taken by the Executive Board on 18 October 2023 and relates to Future of six high rise and resident rehousing - Bailey and Brooklands Towers, Ramshead Heights, Leafield Towers, Raynville Court and Grange.

(Please note that Appendix C to the Executive Board report has been designated as being exempt from publication under the provisions of Access to Information Procedure Rule 10.4 (3))

The Head of Democratic Services submitted a report that presented background papers to a decision made by Executive Board at its meeting of 18^th October 2023, which had been Called-In in accordance with the Council’s Constitution.

The decision had been called in for review by Councillors Barry Anderson, Mark Dobson, Wayne Dixon, Robert Finnigan and Diane Chapman

The Scrutiny Board considered the following written information:

·  Copy of the completed Call In request form.

·  Report of the Director of Communities, Housing and Environment presented to Executive Board at its meeting of 18 October 2023.

·  Extract from the draft minutes of the Executive Board meeting held on 18 October 2023. 

The following were in attendance:

-  Councillor Barry Anderson, Lead Signatory to the Call In

-  Councillor Jessica Lennox, Executive Member for Housing

-  James Rogers, Director of Communities, Housing and Environment

-  Gerald Tinsdale, Chief Officer – Housing

-  Helen Jackson, Head of Business Development and Housing Projects

As the Nominated Lead Signatory to the Call In, Councillor B Anderson addressed the Board on the reasons for the Call-in. 

The following concerns were raised:

·  While it was acknowledged that the buildings were not fit for purpose, all signatories to the call in had concerns regarding the provision of Council, social and affordable housing.

·  Further information was requested about the consultation process including in relation to individual concerns that had been raised by tenants and the details of the questions asked during the consultation.

·  The signatories sought clarity about how many residents supported the proposals, how many had concerns and how many opposed the proposal.

·  Lessons that had been learned from previous consultations.

·  Cllr Anderson queried why copies of the consultation documents and FAQs had not been appended to the Executive Board report.

·  Clarity was sought about whether people had been consulted about the proposed levels of compensation and been provided with information how this could affect their benefits.

·  Whether independent legal advice was available for tenants.

·  The impact on the housing register of including tenants within priority bandings, particularly for those who already have band A and A+ status.

·  Housing supply – signatories queried how many lets per annum are made by the Council and how long would it take to adequately re-house the affected tenants.

·  What happens if suitable accommodation is not found? Will the process be held up until the last resident had moved out of an existing block?

·  What will be the impact of allocating affected tenants direct let status?

·  Has there been a timescale set for re-investment on the sites?

·  Have land swaps with developers been considered?

·  Could a housing company be developed to take over these sites?

·  Why has planning permission for the future use of these sites not been sought?

·  What green priorities have been considered?

·  Has WYCA funding or Government funding been sought for re-development?

·  Could the sites be sold in their current state to a registered social landlord or developer?

·  What works need doing in the interim to keep properties safe and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

To determine whether to release the decision for implementation or recommend to the decisionmaker that the decision should be reconsidered.

The Scrutiny Board considered whether or not to release the decision for implementation. A vote was subsequently held and the Scrutiny Board agreed (by majority decision) that the decision be released.

RESOLVED – That the decision be released for implementation.

The next meeting of the Scrutiny Board (Environment, Housing and Communities) will take place on 7 December at 10.30am. There will be a private pre-meeting for all Scrutiny Board members at 10am.

Thursday, 7 December 2023 at 10.30 a.m.  There will be a pre-meeting for Board Members at 10.00 a.m.