Our regular
estate diary.

Why not check
back frequently
to see what is
going on at
Kingsholm?

Back Issues

Current Month

Home

It was Tenants Forum this evening ... and the day (not to mention Sunday) was spent ploughing through all the "papers" for the meeting.

What, you may ask, is Tenants Forum? It is an "official" City Council group of tenants representatives who meet in the Council Chamber the evening before Housing and Regeneration Committee and debate the committee papers and then send recommendations to the committee. To all intents and purposes, the meeting is run very much on the lines of a council committee - housing officers are present to answer questions so that the voting members (tenants) can come to decisions.

Councillors who are on Housing and Regeneration Committee are present and they know first-hand the reasons behind the decisions made. Really, it's a very good idea and it gives tenant representatives considerable democratic "clout" while taking into account the laws concerning local government.

Gloucester City Council set up the Forum around 10 years ago and it is an exceptionaly rare event when Housing Committee votes against the wishes of the collective wishes of members of Forum. Perhaps the most important decision that Tenats Forum makes each year is the rent increase. Interestingly, the Committee has never gone against the increase suggested by the tenants!

We can only remember one occasion when the Committee has "thrown out" a recommendation of Forum - the was the "crucial" subject of the rent to non-council house tenants for garages under the control of the housing department! (Not exactly a major upset! Forum wanted to charge an amount based on a strictly commerical basis of "market price" for the few garages that were rented to non-tenants, but Housing Committee watered this down considerably.)

We are told that there was another instance, but frankly it was so "important" that we cannot remember what it was!

In the "stone age" (those barely remembered days prior to housing management compulsory competitive tendering), Between each Housing Committee was a Housing Management Sub Committee. This gave a total of eight meetings a year - and thus eight times that Tenants Forum met.

These days there are just four meeting a year - so it doesn't need a rocket scientist to work out that Forum meetings take either twice as long, or that the amount of "work" the Forum does is reduced!

Tonight's meeting started at 6 pm and finish at 9.35 pm. Why so long?

If you look at the agenda, you would realise the vast range of topics that are covered - all of which have considerable tenant involvement and, to a great extent, "ownership".

Any meeting ofter gets bogged down somewhere. And the Forum is no exception. But tonight's deliberations and questions covered just about every aspect of housing management. Certainly, "debate" sometimes strayed from the direct subject, but valid points were made during the period of veering from the "straight and narrow".

For instance, we asked the Contracts Officer for grounds maintenance about the control of weeds that grew inbetween the paving slabs on housing department land. Somehow, our question - while answered! - progressed to the possible extension of the current grounds maintenance contract and whether or not tenants groups wanted an variation in the parts affecting housing land. All valid stuff, and - in this case - a stimulating debate that set up a possible single meeting on the subect before the September Forum!

Perhaps the most "confusing" and time consuming part of the evening was devoted to that subject of housing finance! Well, we all know that, as a breed, accountants are not potential members of the Plain English Society! And when it comes to accountants working in local (or even central) government ... is there ANY hope for mere mortals like Councillors, yet alone tenants!

After a considerable period of time when Forum members were trying to get things straight in their minds about "reserves", "balancing the books", "taking money from the reserves to balance the books" - and we are, naturally, talking telephone numbers here - it finally emerged that the accountant chappie was talking about the projected position at the end of the current financial year, while the Forum members were under the impression that the position was at the end of the last financial year!

It all started with a couple of lines in a "Best Value" report! No "crystal marks" for easy of understanding of this report!

At least councillors at Housing Committee should not be confused tomorrow evening when the discuss the paper!

We took the opportunity of again highlighting the fact that much of the problems in council housing, stemming from lack of investment, in this country could well come from the fact that borrowing for public housing was included is the "PSBR" (Public Service Borrowing Requirement) while in the rest of Europe borrowed cash for similar spending was not! There were nods of approval from officers. We suggested that Housing Committee might like to consider lobbying the Government on the matter.

Alas, and important paper on the performances of housing management matters could not be debated at length because of the time element - this is very often the case! In one of the "indicators" - legal proceedings against tenants, our area housing office which covers the Westgate and Elmbridge estates as well as Kingsholm had nine actual evictions last year, with 24 warrants of evictions applied for and 71 notices of intention to seek possesion. The total actual evictions by the other four area offices totalled nine as well. However the 71 "notices of intention" tied with the White City office as the lowest (the highest being 223 in Matson). We know there are lies, damn lies and statistics, but .... !!!

... Does this mean that our area housing office is really on top of things, or that we have a higher percentage of people that, to coin a phrase, ignore the tenancy conditions? Again, back to the figures ... and we would suggest both reasons apply!

Enough on Tenants Forum! But then very little happened (well it was Monday and the sun did shine - occasionally!

Acting Sgt Andy Johnson of the Gloucestershire Constabulary paid us a visit to ask about how the Police Information Point was going and if we had any ideas. A constructive 30 minutes was spent and we hope he left with the impression that things were going well and that we would not only welcome any development, but would assist wherever we could.

We told him that a number of people had spotted uniformed police walking through the estate - and this had a good effect of people's "perception" of policing.

Tony, our caretaker, told us that there was more than the normal amount of litter for a Monday on the Columbia Close end of the estate. This ties in with the fact that there had been some vandalism - criminal damage - in the area, not to mention considerable graffiti, over the weekend.

The "downside" on a generally constructive day was that the door entry system on 11-20 Sherborne Street has not yet been fixed. Residents will sometimes find that their electronic key fobs will not get them into the block We - and they - live in hope!