Item 9-Appendix 5
West Dunbartonshire Council · 5 March 2025
Back to West Dunbartonshire Council — 5 March 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Appendix 5 Housing Services Consultation Recording Sheet Housing Service …Housing Development & Homelessness team Person/s responsible: Jim McCarron and Jane Mack Consultation Start date: 22/11/24 End Date 31/1/25 Consultation criteria Steps taken 1. The name of consultation / participation exercise Rent setting consultation 2025-26 2. Its aims and objectives To gather tenant views on 2 proposed rent options for 2025/26. Option 1. 8.0% increase (average weekly increase of £7.60). · Maintaining all current services that tenants receive · Delivering our Capital programme of housing investment including the enhanced programme developed with tenants which included the expansion of our CCTV infrastructure · Continuing our New Build housing programme · A Tenant Priority Budget of £200k for tenant led improvements. Option 2. 9% increase (average weekly increase of £8.55). This option is as Option 1, plus: · A new Tenant Assistance Fund of £500k to support tenants in most need to help with their housing costs, provide direct assistance to avoid rent arrears and sustain their tenancies. 3. Who did you invite/include? The consultation was open to all tenants and those residing in homeless temporary accommodation. The consultation was launched at a public meeting on 22/11/24 in Church Street which was open to all tenants and was widely publicised. A copy of the presentation given and information on the options being consulted on was also posted on the Council’s
Page 2
2 Consultation criteria Steps taken website so that it was freely available. An online evening meeting was also provided on 09/1/25, 7pm via Zoom. 4. What methods did you use to promote/invite stakeholders to get involved? (e.g. letters, posters, website) The public meeting to launch the consultation was advertised on the Council’s events webpage, intranet, Tenant Participation Facebook account as well as a direct invite sent to all TRAs, the WDTRO, Sheltered Housing Forum members and tenants on the Interested Tenant Register. Information on the rent options was sent out with the Winter edition of the Housing News on 15/12/24 with information detailing the rationale behind the options and detail of each option. Also included was a free-post voting card that could be used to vote as well as details of how to vote online, by phone, by text or email. The survey was also promoted regularly through the Council’s webpages and social media as well as on our Tenant Participation Facebook account. Email and text reminders were also sent via QL to tenants with contact details. Posters promoting the consultation with information on the ways to vote were put up in Multi-storey flat noticeboards. WDC intranet was also used to encourage WDC staff who are also tenants, to vote. Housing officers and Homeless support officers were also sent a briefing note on the consultation details and asked to encourage their tenants to vote. 5. Who actually took part? (Number of individuals and or number of tenant organisations represented) A total of 1669 tenants responded and voted for their preferred option in the survey giving a response rate of 16.6%. This is less than the number of responses received last year (1724 responses which equated to a 17.3% response rate). 6. What method(s) did you use to obtain their views? (e.g. focus/working group, newsletter, survey) Why did you choose this method(s)? A quick and easy survey was used to gather tenant’s views. All tenants were encouraged to vote for their preferred rent option with a range of voting methods offered to make it as easy as possible (free-post voting card, online survey, text and email options).
Page 3
3 Consultation criteria Steps taken This method was chosen to gather the views of as many tenants as possible in a clear and most accessible way possible. The information provided was presented in as clear and understandable way as possible and made available online for any tenant to refer to and paper copies made available on request. We also used staff to promote the survey and to encourage dialogue with tenants and to explain the options being considered. The Tenant Participation Officer’s contact details were also provided for tenants to ask any questions and a number of tenants got in touch. 7. What good practice or minimum standards can you evidence as part of your consultation? A 10 week consultation period was used to collect views which is longer than the statutory 8 weeks but as we had to consult over the Christmas period it was reasonable to provide more time for tenants to participate. Freepost voting cards, phoning, text and email options were made available to all tenants as well as the online survey so that tenants could use a method they were most comfortable with and at no cost. All financial information was presented as clearly and understandably as possible as well as being available on-line for public scrutiny. 8. What was the outcome of the consultation? A total of 10,049 households were contacted and the 1669 responses received represents a response rate of 16.6%. Of the responses received, Option 1 (8% increase) got 1342 votes = 80.4% Option 2 (9% increase) got 327 votes = 19.6% The clear preference of the tenants who participated was for Option 1, the 8% increase and this will be recommended to the Council for approval as the rent increase for 2025/26. 9. How did you feedback to participants the outcome? Once the 5 March Council meeting has concluded, the survey results and final rent setting decision will be reported in the Spring Housing News, on the Council webpages and through the TP Facebook account. All rent increases must be notified to tenants in writing with 28 days’ notice so all tenants will be advised of the rent increase
Page 4
4 Consultation criteria Steps taken and how much the increase means for their own weekly and annual rent charge. 10. How did tenant involvement influence your consultation? Due to the financial pressures of increased costs on the Housing Revenue Account, there was increased pressure for the financial estimates that the rent consultation was based on to be as accurate as possible. Unfortunately, this meant that this year there was not enough time to develop possible rent options in conjunction with tenant representatives. The focus was on keeping the rent increase options as low as possible, with an option of a higher increase designed to assist tenants most in need. Whilst this did mean less tenant involvement in developing the actual options, the rent setting consultation practices that we have developed over the last few years were still put into place in terms of promoting and making the consultation as accessible as possible. We have continued to increase tenant understanding and provide the opportunity to scrutinise the HRA through our Joint Rent Group which includes tenant volunteers, housing staff and the Housing Convener. The Joint Rent Group has also helped make the financial information being presented via rent setting consultation as clear and understandable as possible so tenants can make informed choices. Involvement was promoted by additional text and email reminders that we can send from QL now that we hold more contact details for tenants. This has helped increase response rates over the last 2 years and means that more tenants are having their say on this important issue. 11. Are you able to demonstrate this? Yes - rent setting communications and information on webpages. 12. How have you demonstrated to tenants that involvement made a difference? The preferred option from the consultation exercise is for the 8% rent increase and that is the recommendation being made to be considered by Councilors.
Page 5
5 Consultation criteria Steps taken Tenant involvement in the rent setting process will be promoted in the spring edition of the Housing News and used to help encourage more tenant involvement and reiterate the influence they can have on this important issue. 13. Did you check with participants that they were happy with the opportunities given to make their views known and that they felt that we listened and acted upon them? There was a small decrease in responses, 1669 compared to 1724 last year which was disappointing. The TP officer’s contact details were given on promotion material and a number of tenants contacted mainly concerned that there wasn’t a ‘no increase’ option or about the level of the proposed increases. Some also voiced concerns that voting won’t change the outcome. In total 26 tenants actively refused to vote for either option after opening the survey and many added comments about concerns around affordability of any increase. Additional information and reassurance regarding the process was provided where possible. 14. What worked well, what didn’t work well – or any other comments you have. Our response rate was helped by the extended consultation period and by additional text and email reminders that we can send from QL where we now hold more contact details for tenants. There was a spike in voting after the text and email reminders were sent each time so was an effective way of prompting tenants to vote. Facebook reminders about the survey were also used and got good reaches. 189 freepost voting cards were returned which is more than last year (120) and means that this is still a preferred method of voting for a reasonable amount of people. Access to the voting cards also relied on people opening up the Housing News– previously were sent out as a specific mailing but including with the Housing News is more cost effective. All the negative comments received about the consultation were in relation to the affordability of any rent increase. WDC has one of the highest local authority rent charges in Scotland and affordability is a concern for tenants but also for the Council as a housing provider.