Retreating into the hills while Brent implodes

Off to the hills for a week so no postings on Wembley Matters for a while.

It looks as if I will return to a changed Brent Council landscape. Any tips on who will be acting Chief Exec if today's golden handshake negotiations succeed?

Any money on Andy Donald?

Will the Ann John loyalists strike back?

Keep up on Twitter @bktimes

A new primary school for Wembley and other children's issues

The September 19th Brent Council Executive will be a big night for Krutika Pau, Director of Children and Families, with several major reports from her department being discussed.

However the first on is being fronted by Andy Donald, Director of Major Projects and Regeneration and concerns the acquisition of a site in the Wembley Stadium area for a new primary school.  This has been on the cards for a while and was part of the original Quintain/Wembley Plan. It was expected to be in Fulton Road but concerns have been expressed about the proximity of 'bad neighbour' waste management facilities. These concerns will have been heightened by the recent problem with a vile stench from the Careys/Seneca MRF in Hannah Close.

Educationally, and this is where Krutika Pau comes in, it is likely to be controversial if the council follows through the Executive's August decision to vigorously purse partnerships with free school and academy providers.

Ms Pau will be leading on 'A Plan for Children and Families in Brent 2012-2015' which sets out how to keep Brent children healthy and safe, close the attainment gap between different groups, provide school places and integrate services to 'develop resilient families'. Complex and challenging.

The Executive will also consider the Local Safeguarding Children's Board Annual Report and will be expecting to see significant improvements in some areas that were only deemed adequate when last assessed.  The Annual Fostering and Adoption Annual Report is also due to be considered and attention will focus on whether there have been improvements in the rate of adoption placements, the number of adoption orders, increasing the number of Brent adopters for Brent children and earlier matching of children to adopters.

For fostering the council seeks to increase the number of foster parents recruited and move children out of Independent Fostering Agencies.

Brent Executive agrees free schools, academies and privatisation

Brent Executive took a few more strides along the privatisation road this evening.

They agreed to look for free school and academy partners in order to meet the demand for school places and approved school expansions increasing the size of some primary schols to more than 1,000 pupils. Although Cllr Arnold, lead member for children and families, said that this was an 'educational approach'  I fear for young children in such large institutions - particularly those on the autistic spectrum. Andy Donald's report did not mention the Gwenneth Rickus Building, currently the Centre for Staff Development Centre, in Brentfield Road. This was formerly part of Sladebrook High School and will become redundant when the Civic Centre opens next year.  It  may be put on the market along with Brent Town Hall - or perhaps it is ear-marked as a potential free school?

 The Executive  agreed to set up Brent Meanwhile Partnership (see previous blog LINK) which gives further powers to Andy Donald, Director of Regeneration and Major Projects - although Cllr Crane did not mention this in his very brief report which did not do justice to the wider repercussions of the policy..Donald will be delegated  to set up a London wide organisation as well as a local one and will be Brent's representative.

The public are not allowed to see how much of their money the council is going to pay to out-source the facilities management of the Council's entire property portfolio to Europa Facilities Services Ltd in a contact that will run from November until June 30th. Andy Donald's report outlines TUPE procedures for existing staff and says that the contractor has agreed to a staged voluntary redundancy process which he 'believes is acceptable to the GMB'. The staff concerned are older than the council average and have a higher proportion of ethnic minorities.

Following delays in setting up a new management agreement for the Brent Housing Partnership (BHP) the  Executive  agreed to delegate authority ot the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects (Andy Donald - of course)  in consultation with the Director of Legal and Procurement any  subsequent amendments between now and March 2013.

Procurement errors lead to school expansion delays

Modular building from Elliott's website

As Brent Council Executive is set to discuss further school expansions this evening, it has become clear that current expansions at Mitchell Brook, Fryent and Barham primary schools will not be completed by the forecast date.

The delay appears to have been caused by problems in the preparation of the original bid documents according to the report by Richard Barrett, Assistant Director of  Regeneration and Major Projects, that recommends Andy Donald, awards the contract.  Normally contracts of this value require approval by the Executive but they delegated this authority to Andy Donald, Director of Regeneration and Major Projects at their April 2012 meeting.

On receipt of bids and initial evaluation, it was determined that there were some areas of ambiguity in the Council’s bid documents which had led the different bidders to interpret the Council’s requirements in different ways. As a result, the decision was taken to retender the pricing element only to ensure that all the prices were submitted for exactly the same requirements. Unfortunately when these further tenders were received and clarified, all of the bids were unsuitable, either because of being too high or because or qualifications to the requirement to accept the Council’s contractual terms. This led to a further process of further process of clarifying contractual terms around design risk and giving the opportunity to reprice.

The contract will be awarded to Elliott Group Ltd  with a value of £3.1m for Barham Primary, £4.4m for Fryent Primary and £2.7m for Mitchell Brook Primary. All with a start date of August 22nd.  Because of the time constraints it was decided to use a modular steel framed building system for all three schools which themselves vary greatly in their architecture. 

Barrett argues that despite the delay the timings will still allow for pupils to start in September 2013. However this assumes that all goes according to plan, which has not always been the case with the expansion programme.  Even a July 2013 completion date is challenging for schools in terms of setting up new classrooms with the potential for that work having to be carried out during the summer holiday.

'Major Projects' becomes even more major with Charity project

A Windows on Willesden shop on St Patrick's Day

Brent Council will, if Executive approval is given, set up a new national charitable organisation, to help deal with the blight caused by empty properties in areas awaiting redevelopment or closed in the face of the economic down turn. LINK

The Director of  Regeneration and Major Projects, Andy Donald,  responsible for the Executive report, will be authorised to set up the Meanwhile Foundation with Locality and other partners and enter into a Framework agreement on behalf of Brent Council with the national Meanwhile Foundation to set up a Brent Meanwhile Partnership. The reports notes that the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects will most likely be the Council's representative on the Foundation Board.

Regeneration and Major Projects, already involved with the controversial Willesden Green Library Redevelopment and the Civic Centre and responsible for the upcoming massive school expansion programme, is already the most powerful Brent Council department.  The Meanwhile Project represents a further extension of this power.

Donald is keen on projects that, on the surface at least, are at  no or little cost to the Council, and that makes him popular with Labour councillors. Perhaps they should bear in mind the popular expression about free lunches.. The report states:

In partnership with Locality, Brent Council will jointly form the Meanwhile Foundation as a new national charity with Brent contributing the essential £5,000 start-up income and Locality providing development time and expertise in kind. The £5000 will be drawn from the New Initiatives budget.

The Brent Meanwhile Partnership will then contribute to the Meanwhile Foundation a sum of £10,000 per annum for 5 years. In the first two years, this sum will be paid from the council’s New Initiatives budget, but it is intended that from years 3 – 5, the contribution will be paid by surpluses generated from using assets on a temporary basis (it is these assets that the Foundation will carry the tenancies for). The council should keep under review its involvement beyond five years. The contributions will be used to meet the on-going administrative costs of the Foundation.

Clearly these are small sums in terms of initial funding but in the medium term funding is dependent on the generation surpluses from the temporary assets. However, the Foundation as well as being a charity will be a company limited by guarantee, and this will reduce their liabilities to a maximum of £1 if the company became insolvent.

The renting out of these premises would be subsidised by reductions in rates (Non Domestic Discretionary Rates - NNDR) but these are due to be replaced in April 2013 under the Localism Act 2011. The Council will have powers to reduce rates but the report notes that details are not yet available and warns that the impact on Council revenue needs to be taken into account.

Prospective tenants should be warned that a special 'meanwhile lease' will apply:

A particular characteristic of the lease is that it removes provisions in respect of security of tenure under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. For tenants this means that they have no legal right to remain in the property at the end of the term and no legal right to apply to the landlord for a new lease. The tenant might request a new lease from the landlord but the landlord is not obliged to agree to this and it will be a matter for negotiation between the parties. In this respect, the lease protects landlords from occupants claiming ‘squatters’  rights’ …

It is anticipated that the tenancy model for this scenario would be that there is a head lease signed between the landlord and the council, and then a meanwhile tenancy between the council and the Foundation. This agreement will be tilted in favour of the council so that it is not exposed to tenancy risks

These are complex arrangements and it is to be hoped that councillors study them in complex detail before the Executive before  rubber stamping them.

Below you can find further explanation from the report going before the Executive. The paragraph in bold is particularly interesting in the light of the Council's arguments over the Willesden Bookshop.

The term “meanwhile” is used to describe the use of vacant premises or land while it is not being used – it is the pause in the development process between the old and the new. This pause can be a few months or a number of years. The use of vacant premises has become an issue high on political agendas as people see the impact of the recession at street level. Vacancy often suggests an area is in decline, and vacancy often leads to further vacancy.

Using vacant premises can have cumulative beneficial impacts on high streets within regeneration areas: the reduction in vacancy can lead to further business investment in an area that appears lively and animated; the spaces can be used for business start ups or community based projects; and they can reduce the incidence of vandalism.

Empty property is now readily available. Landlords are becoming wise to the benefits of letting their premises on a ‘meanwhile tenancy’ as this relieves them of empty premises business rates liabilities and security costs. As demonstrated in Willesden Green and Wembley, these premises can be secured on favourable terms.

In the last two years, the council has embarked on a series of successful meanwhile projects to assist with delivering regeneration within South Kilburn, Wembley and Willesden Green. The South Kilburn Studios project transformed a derelict portacabin site in the estate and, now within its second year, is providing workspace and valuable training opportunities to local people. In the Wembley Triangle section of the High Road and Wembley Hill Road, a long term vacant shop unit is being brought into use

to provide people with an opportunity to explore how they want to interact with Wembley and use the high number of empty spaces to develop ideas for business and community ideas and try them in a low cost and low risk arena.

In Wembley there are also swathes of vacant land that is not due for development for several years. This could be used to help deliver the council’s regenerative objectives in the area. In South Kilburn, the council has already delivered South Kilburn Studios in partnership with the South Kilburn Neighbourhood Trust and it is likely that further opportunities for projects will be presented as the regeneration programme rolls forward. In Willesden Green, the council has delivered an Outer London Fund project

on the high street taking on vacant units, providing design advice to existing traders, using space in the Willesden Green Library Centre and forming a local town team of interested stakeholders.

 Lessons learned from these projects include:

• there is significant inherent value in property that can lever regenerative benefits by extracting social benefits from physical assets;

• business rates liabilities can render meanwhile projects unviable;

• procuring a team that can deliver the quality of outcomes can be difficult when constrained by the existing procurement guidelines and financial regulations required by the council;

• projects that intend to use privately owned commercial premises can benefit from specialist meanwhile property expertise to secure tenancies;

• imported and curated project start ups can miss opportunities to develop and foster grassroots interest to the particular local neighbourhood; and

• projects without a sustainable business model can require an on-going subsidy, albeit these can be small sums that may be justified by the quality of outcomes from projects.

In consideration of the lessons learned, it has become apparent that existing and future projects could substantially benefit from a form of governance vehicle that can be “asset controlling”, “asset using” and “enabling” to strengthen the council’s ability to set up and maintain effective meanwhile projects, and in particular:

• help to relieve the council of tenancy risks that can arise from such projects;

• allow projects to benefit from business rates relief to enable projects to be financially viable;

• ensure the quality of outcomes for projects by streamlining procurement process and allowing the forward funding of projects; and

• secure the sustainability and proper governance of successful projects.

Budget pressures: homelessness and school places shortage

The pressure on Brent Council's budget and particularly those regarding the shortage of schools places and the impact of the local housing allowance cap were revealed at the Budget Overview and Scrutiny Committee of January 11th, the Minutes of which have just been published:

Andy Donald (Director of Regeneration and Major Projects) circulated a Powerpoint presentation outlining the context in which the department's budget was set, the budget pressures and other issues facing the department and the major capital projects underway.  Andy Donald explained that because the department had only been formed in October 2010 the current year was one of transition.  The year ahead was the first chance to view the department's budget as a whole and plan for the future.  The biggest pressure on the current year's budget was the level of spend on temporary accommodation which was forecast to overspend by £928,000. 

Andy Donald explained that the main reason for the overspend was due to the Local Housing Allowance cap introduced in April 2011.  The service had in the past been managed largely as a demand led service but with a rise since 2010/11 of 38% in the number of homeless applications received and an 86% increase in the placing of families into hotels and bed and breakfast accommodation, a different approach was needed. 

Actions being taken to mitigate the overspend included the provision of advice, strategies to prevent homelessness and encouragement to take housing out of the borough.  However, Andy Donald stated that the situation was only likely to get worse as Housing Benefit and wider welfare reforms were implemented.   The committee noted that a contingency budget of £1M was being held centrally to fund any final overspend in this area for the current year.  The department's agreed savings of £3.8M remained on track with £1.2M coming from the supporting people budget, £440,000 from the staffing structure review and a collection of smaller changes to the housing service. 

      

Andy Donald drew attention to the budget issues for the future.  By 2014/15 the borough would need the equivalent of 70 additional classrooms to cater for the increased demand for school places.  A sum of £25M had been secured from the Government to help address this but a figure in the region of £60-65M was needed.  Therefore work was underway on reviewing the Council's entire portfolio of school buildings to assess how best to use the funding secured and meet the demand.  The New Homes Bonus would appear in the Council's budget for the first time in 2012/13 in the sum of £1.068M.  It had been decided that this money would be used to support the Council's capital programme.  Andy Donald reported that it was anticipated that new rules would be passed to allow Councils to recover the total cost of their planning service which would lead to an increase in income during 2012/13.  He further explained that presently planning fees were set nationally, but if the Council was allowed to recover its total cost it would generate an additional £800,000 approximately. 

  More savings were to be taken from the supporting people service and from the housing needs transformation project.  There would also be revenue savings taken from capital projects.  A big change to the Housing Revenue Account would take place on 1 April 2012 following the Government making a one-off settlement to the Council of £197M to pay off a proportion of the HRA debt and no longer provide subsidy of £8.5M in return for the Council taking responsibility for the remaining debt and retaining the rental income. 

A business plan for how the Council would in future manage, maintain and improve the housing stock was being developed but one risk already identified were the proposed changes to Housing Benefit which would result in benefit being paid direct to the tenant rather than to the Council with consequences for rent collection levels.  It was pointed out that the national rent convergence scheme would continue and so rent levels would still be determined by the Government.

Andy Donald outlined the major capital projects included in the Council's programme, including South Kilburn, the new Civic Centre, the Willesden Green redevelopment and the schools programme. 

In answer to questions asked by members of the committee concerning housing and homelessness, Andy Donald explained that when someone first presented themselves as in need of housing the first action was to see if they could be prevented from becoming statutorily homeless but if this was not possible the Council then had a duty to house them.  If there was no permanent accommodation available then temporary accommodation was used.  The Council provided advice to people in an effort to support their housing needs before they were determined statutorily homeless.  Reference was made to the rent deposit scheme and Andy Donald stated that further details on this could be provided to members.  In answer to a question about enforcing standards, it was explained that the Council could only use housing legislation to take action against sub-standard housing if it was at least three storeys high and was only resourced to carry out its statutory role, although action could be taken using planning laws.  A review of the Council's private housing service was to be carried out.

Addressing questions around the provision of school places, Andy Donald stated that, whilst there were a number of variables that would need to be considered including land availability and building types, at best the £25M would only meet between one third and half the anticipated increased demand for primary school places. 

Regarding the New Homes Bonus, Andy Donald explained that this money was provided by the government effectively matching the Council Tax for each new property built for a period of 6 years following completion and so was based on the number of new homes provided within the borough and distributed according to a formula.  Therefore the £1.68M would continue to be received over the next five years with additional funding arising from new homes subsequently built within the borough.  He stated that more detail on this could be provided if necessary.

Andy Donald explained more fully the new arrangements for managing the HRA but pointed out that financial rules relating to the HRA remained so it would continue to be ringfenced.  Clive Heaphy (Director of Finance and Corporate Services) added that as a result of the rent convergence scheme the average rent increase in Brent for 2012/13 would be 7.2%. 

The committee had previously been informed of the new arrangements proposed for retaining business rates.  A question was therefore asked as to how competing land use would be managed with the pressure to attract new businesses into the borough to increase the level of business rates and to build new houses to benefit under the New Homes Bonus.  Andy Donald acknowledged that both would generate income but would have to be managed according to planning policy and complex modelling arrangements for different parts of the borough. 

A question was asked on whether the Council was working with any neighbouring boroughs on joint projects.  Andy Donald replied that there were some discussions taking place but that Brent was generally making the running on these.  They included the potential to share some facilities management functions, housing management services and some other service provision.   

   

Andy Donald was asked to explain more fully the demand on temporary accommodation.  He stated that for the year November to November just gone the number of households in hotels and bed and breakfast had increased from 139 to 250.  It was expected that by the end of the year 1635 new homeless applications would have been received of which 580 would have been accepted.  There was a need to understand what was driving this increase but it was already known that a significant number came from landlords evicting tenants. With regard to the supporting people budget, it stood at £10.8M but £1.2M savings had been made during the current financial year with an additional £600,000 being made next year and £900,000 the year after taking the budget to £9.3M by 2013/14.  The service worked with the most vulnerable people through a raft of support mechanisms all of which were now commissioned out.  This expenditure was no longer ring-fenced.  A review of the housing needs service would result in an additional 20-25 posts being deleted but Andy Donald was confident that an effective, efficient service would continue to be delivered.  He offered to forward members more detail on the restructuring if they wished to receive it.