Community asset transfer (CAT) and devolution of service delivery - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Community asset transfer (CAT) and devolution of service delivery in Wales Prepared by Community Matters : The National Federation of Community Organisations 1

Welcome Introductions House Keeping The way we will work together Handouts 2

The National Federation of Community Organisations est. 1945 • 853 Members including: • 749 community organisations • 57 Local Federations of Community Organisations and other local supporting organisations • 47 Local Authorities and Housing Associations • Reach : 4.500 + organisations via our e bulletin • 96% manage a community building • 56% of buildings owned by LA • 25% under £15K turnover • Average of £80K turnover • Just over half employ staff 3

Community Matters Services • Free Advice service (phone and email) • Legal and Accountancy Clinic • Extensive Online information and guidance sheets, specimen policies and procedures and model documents covering, for example, governance, strategic leadership, financial management, managing an asset, and managing volunteers and employees • TM Quality Standards and The VISIBLE the PreVISIBLE tool • Your Value – our social impact tool • A full bespoke consultancy and training service 4

Role of Community Matters • Advocate and lead on policy for both national and local government concerning the community sector, community empowerment, CAT, and preparing for commissioning. • Delivery Partner in national programmes including currently the My Community Rights programme and the new Our Place scheme. • Long experience of supporting COs and LAs in negotiation of long leases and successful CATs • Team of expert consultants in field of asset management, business planning, legal and financial issues, governance, and community empowerment and engagement. 5

What is CAT The term ‘Community Asset Transfer’ is defined as ‘where the Council transfers land or buildings into the ownership or management of a Voluntary and/or Community Sector organisation or social enterprise’’. 6

Most usual model for asset transfer? Usually for less than market value 1. Freehold transfer 2. Long Lease – 25+ years For Community Asset Transfer options 1 and 2 are the normal expectations 7

Other forms of asset transfer 3. Short term lease e.g. 10 years 4. A very short term lease – 2-3 years 5. An annual licence Option 3 may be used e.g. where the building has a short life. Options 4 and 5. Are sometimes used when either party has identified major risks or wants to take an incremental approach and does not want to over commit initially. 8

Not a format for asset transfer A Service Level Agreement (SLA) or Management agreement is not a right to occupy, although it may be a useful adjunct to an occupation 9

Clauses to watch out for within leases • Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 • Break clause 10

Asset lock Freehold transfers or long leases will contain an ‘asset - lock’ - clauses that prevent the asset being assigned or sold on for unintended financial gain and the loss of any agreed community benefits 11

Claw back and disposal of agricultural land and change of use • Claw back applies to freehold transfers • The claw-back principle can be applied to enable a selling owner to bind the buyer and other future owners to pay overage if the land becomes more valuable as a result of a new use arising from the grant of a future planning permission • Disposal of agricultural land and change of use- Usually applies for more commercially based disposals 12

Formats for asset transfer Using CAT handout let us consider the various formats – strengths, weakness and risks If you had the your choice which one would you prefer for your community? Why? 13

Myth busters • Disposal at an undervalue • State Aid – applies to both CAT and service contracts 14

The case for local devolution Offer the prospect of: Better quality,' joined-up' forms of service delivery based on  community priorities. Local authority main programmes and budgets are better  targeted at community needs and priorities. A territorial focus for crosscutting measures, which emphasise  outcomes for citizens. the opportunity for enhanced community participation and  partnerships with local authorities. 15

Local authority approach to devolution of services • Project-specific approaches. Good first approach. The quickest and easiest way of securing community engagement e.g. small environment projects or play areas. • Thematic – e.g. crime and disorder, education, the environment, and housing management • Area-based – wide range of policy areas and service delivery 16

Models for Service Devolution  Budget comes with the transfer of service.  Total cut in service unless community council take it on.  Partnerships – co-design/co- production.  Do you know of/can you think of any services that might be effected by this? 17

Handout. Models for devolution of services Using the handout let us consider the various formats: • Strengths, opportunities, weakness and risks. • Is there anything else you would like to add? • If you had the your choice which one would you prefer for your community? Why? 18

Background for asset transfer and service devolution  Cuts to local authority funding.  Having to do more, better, for less.  Public assets which have become liabilities.  Difficult decisions re cuts in service delivery – some only providing what they must because of the budget cuts  A cost to the community in terms of blight, lost services and lost opportunities 19

Policy drivers for CAT and devolution of services • 2003 Welsh assembly gives green light for greater asset transfer to communities • Commitment reconfirmed in 2009 – Social Enterprise Action Plan 20

Policy drivers for CAT and devolution of services • Local Government Act 2000: • Drew attention to the role of local authorities as community leaders • Introduced the wide ranging power for L.A.s to “do anything which they consider is likely to achieve” the promotion of economic, social and environmental well-being of their area to achieve sustainable development 21

Policy drivers for CAT and devolution of services • Local Govt (Wales) Measure 2011 put community councils on the same footing as Local Authorities re the power of well being. • Welsh govt. set a financial limit re power of well being under section 137 Local Govt Act. • Based on electorate number multiplied by set amount – changing annually. April 2014 £7.20 • Note - Williams Commission report advocating reduction in number of local authorities and amalgamation of community councils in Wales 22

Policy drivers for CAT and devolution of services • December 2003 • Rules relaxed re power to transfer an asset at less than market value. • Requirement to gain specific consent of the National Assembly for Wales no longer required where undervalue is less than £2m • BUT local authority has to be satisfied this will help secure “promotion or improvement of the economic, social or environmental well- being of the area” 23

Policy drivers for CAT and devolution of services Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009: • give local authorities more power and freedom to respond to local needs • a duty on local councils to promote democracy - putting local authorities at the forefront of the drive to reconnect people with public and political decision-making. • empowering citizens and communities to become involved in the design and delivery of local public services and improving their communities • new rights for the citizen to have more information and influence over the local decisions • new powers to hold politicians and officials to account 24

Policy drivers for CAT and devolution of services • Wales Programme for Improvement (WPI) 2002 and reformed through the Local Government (Wales) Measure 2009. • Local authorities are being encouraged to develop a corporate, strategic approach to service delivery and the use of resources. This could include an asset management strategy and a procurement strategy, both set within the overall vision for the area (the Community Strategy). 25

The opportunity  There is a need to balance the cost of the service or value of the asset to the local authority in pure £’s with the value it does/could bring to the community  Move towards local delivery and control of services 26

The opportunity  Local people can have a greater say and play a part.  Empowers local communities  Puts local organisations in control  Encourages pride of place  Generates wealth in our communities 27

The opportunity • Local organisations often best placed to manage services and facilities in their local communities • It empowers local communities, puts local organisations in control, encourages pride of place • Deliver better services to specifically meet the needs of the community • Local knowledge, use of volunteers and hands-on management contributes towards community empowerment 28