Community Asset Transfer Policy

The Draft Community Asset Transfer Policy

Draft for Consultation - June 2011

Forward

We are serious in our intent to ensure that those community assets that we currently hold can be considered for transfer to safe hands of organizations throughout the borough whether they are voluntary, parishes or specialist trusts; so that they can be managed and run directly by local residents for the communities they live in.

The current localism bill passing through parliament strengthens this aim and may well create both opportunities and tests. Yet its purpose is clear, and we are delighted that this proposed legislation strengthens our ambition.

When reading this consultation policy, I know you will give careful thought to the balance of responsibilities that overseeing assets brings, whether they are buildings, recreation facilities, land or allotments. Whilst we wish to be very encouraging and open in our approach, we are also aware that there are risks especially for newly formed organizations, that we would wish to mitigate.

So we are seeking a sensible way forward that creates opportunity but diminishes risk. I know that you will have sound views and experience to bring to bear upon this. So please would you carefully consider these proposals and tell us if they are right or how and what you would want changed to improve them.

Cllr. Mike Cosgrove - Cabinet Member for Communities and Localism

1. Purpose of the policy

1.1 The purpose of this policy is to provide a clear framework on Community Asset Transfer (CAT).

2. Definition and context of Community Asset Transfer

2.1 The term 'Community Asset Transfer' is defined as 'where the Council transfers land or buildings into the ownership or management of a Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) organisation'.

2.2 The Policy applies to Council assets where community activities are the primary purpose of the asset, e.g., Community Halls and Allotments.

3. National and local policy context

3.1 The 2006 Local Government White Paper, Strong and Prosperous Communities, confirmed the then Government's intention to increase opportunities for community asset ownership and management.

3.2 The later Quirk Review, Making Assets Work, published in May 2007, found that a careful increase in the community's stake in an asset can bring a wide range of additional benefits for the community, the organisation receiving the asset, and the local authority facilitating the transfer.

3.3 The Government's response to this was its Empowerment Action Plan published in 2007, which included actions relating to the transfer of assets and to a programme of support for community anchors.

3.4 Following the change in Government in May 2010, the Localism Bill was introduced to Parliament on 13 December 2010. This Bill aims to shift power from central government back into the hands of individuals, communities and councils. It stated that: 'We want to pass significant new rights direct to communities and individuals, making it easier for them to get things done and achieve their ambitions for the place where they live'.

3.5 As part of the Localism Bill, a 'community right to challenge' has been introduced. Once enacted the Right will give local communities the ability to register an interest to bid to take over a local public service which they would like to run better or differently.

3.6 The following local policy documents include reference to asset management and transfer to the third sector/partners.

Ambitions for Swale: this is the Borough's Sustainable Community Strategy which sets out our vision for the kind of place that we would like Swale to be in the future. It describes our priorities over the next twenty years, and sets out shorter term targets to focus us in the right direction.
The Corporate Plan: contains Priority Action SSC3 - Develop new and existing partnership arrangements for the management and delivery of public services.
The Swale Asset Management Plan: production of the Asset Transfer Policy is the Plan's number one priority.
The VCS strategy: the strategy sets out the Council's commitment to support the Voluntary and Community Sector.
The Kent Partners Compact: is an agreement which brings together representatives from the public and voluntary and community sectors to encourage closer working and co-operation.

4. Aims of Community Asset Transfer policy

4.1 The aims of the policy are to:

(i) Sustaining viability and improve service provision where it is better for the VCS to provide the service;
(ii) Deliver sustainable solutions that are accepted, agreed, 'owned' and driven by the local community;
(iii) Increase the number of local people helping to run or own local services or assets;
(iv) Realise wider community benefits such as increased levels of volunteering, social capital and civic participation; and
(v) Improve the leverage of external funding into the local area through increased funding opportunities, encouraging economic development, and social enterprise activity.

5. Swale Borough Council Statement on Community Asset Transfer

5.1 The Council views its policy on community asset disposal positively as part of its long-term support to / engagement and partnership with the VCS. The Council will therefore seek to implement the policy through targeted awareness raising, outreach and support to encourage Voluntary and Community Sector Organisations (VCOs) to take on appropriate assets, linked to its wider ongoing programmes of support to the VCS.

5.2 As a result, the following principles will be applied to CAT unless there are circumstances specific to the asset which suggests an alternative approach.

5.3 Transfers will only take place to a properly constituted group (for example, but not limited to, a Trust, Charity, or Social Enterprise) that can demonstrate that it has a fully worked up and credible Business Plan for the asset in question. A CAT will not proceed if the VCS organisation cannot satisfy all requirements that are detailed in the Community Asset Transfer Assessment.

5.4 Transfers will normally be in the form of a lease of up to 125 years rather than the transfer of the freehold to reduce risk of the few asset transfers that will fail. This ensures that:

The council retains the ability to have influence over the future use of the asset in the event that it is no longer needed for community use;
There is a straightforward and low cost 'exit strategy' in the event that the trust fails as the asset will automatically revert to the council.

5.5 Where there are circumstances specific to the asset that result in freehold transfer being demonstrably the best option, then a covenant would be imposed to ensure that the asset retained community benefit. However, it should be noted that although covenants can be imposed on a freehold transfer these are generally more difficult to enforce in the long term than via a leasehold route as there can be problems with enforcing freehold covenants and there must be some retained land that is capable of benefiting from the restriction. Where there is no retained land which would benefit any covenant imposed would be unenforceable and only a leasehold transfer can be considered.

5.6 The Council will seek to ensure that any asset transfer is sustainable in the long term by ensuring that the terms and conditions imposed upon the Voluntary and Community Sector Organisation (VCO) are not unduly onerous, but are reasonable and affordable within the resources available.

5.7 Financial support provided to the VCO will be decided on a case-by-case basis but will follow the following principles:

It will be based on existing budgets for the asset;
Any additional funding will be determined through the Council's normal budget process and prioritised against other growth bids;
Funding to support the VCO will decrease year on year;
Except in very exceptional circumstances, no CAT will be made if the cost after transfer exceeds the cost of retaining the service in-house.

5.8 Where the Council directly employees staff to work directly at the asset, then both the Council and the CVO will adhere to TUPE regulations.

5.9 All issues related to financial support and support in kind, arrangements related to staffing, and service expectations (where relevant) will be captured in a Partnership Agreement, to be concluded prior to transfer taking place. This will also include any appropriate monitoring arrangements.

5.10 All Community Asset Transfer priority transfers and proposals will be advertised on the Swale Borough Council website.

5.11 The Council will comply with the principals of the Kent Partners COMPACT.

5.12 The Council will at all times respect the independence of the VCO.

6. Priority assets for transfer

6.1 The Council has identified those Community Assets it sees as a priority for transfer. These are detailed in Appendix II.

6.2 This list will be kept under review and considered against the changing demands of the community, the pace of the development of appropriate VCOs, and the benefits that VCO management will bring to an Asset.

6.3 Requests from the VCS for CATs that are not a priority for the Council or are not owned by the Council will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the Asset Management Group.

7. The Community Asset Transfer Toolkit

7.1 In order to assess and deliver a Community Asset Transfer a toolkit has been developed to assist both the VCO wishing to take on a Community Asset and the Council officers currently managing that asset.

7.2 In assessing proposals for asset transfer, the Council will attempt to measure the relative benefits and risks of the available options in order to inform its decision-making. It will also relate these benefits to wider Council priorities.

7.3 Asset transfer decisions are essentially a choice between:

The Council continues to run the asset/service; or
Community Asset Transfer to a VCO; or
Commercial tender of the asset/service; or
Commercial disposal of the asset and alternative service provision made or the service ceases.

7.4 In order to assess whether a CAT is suitable the 'Assessing the asset transfer' checklist (Appendix 1) should be completed to establish if a CAT is viable, and to identify any support the VCO requires in order to be in a suitable position to take forward the CAT.

7.5 The stages of asset transfer should provide a clear reference and test of a proposed asset transfer against the principles and processes outlined in this policy. It should be integral to the stages involved in an asset transfer project and provide the basis for decision-making on a proposed transfer.

Table of Stages of Community Asset Transfer

No.	Stages	Toolkit Reference	Timescale
1.	Identify need in the community for a physical community resources base. Respond to requests from VCS to take on a Community Asset.		6 weeks
2.	Is the asset for transfer on the current priorities list? If no undertake review of priorities through Asset Management Group.	Asset Transfer Priority List (Appendix III)	8 weeks
3.	Once VCS and asset are identified, complete business case including SBC budget plan.	Business Case Budget Plan	26 weeks
4.	Complete initial community asset transfer assessment identify any areas of need or concern.	Community Asset Transfer Assessment	4 weeks
5.	Compile action plan to address needs of VCO, e.g. policies, training etc.		8 weeks
6.	Negotiate draft terms of asset transfer.	Model Heads of Terms Model Partnership Agreement Model Business Plan (VCS/Trust) Model Business Case (SBC)	8 weeks
7.	Proposal of asset transfer to Cabinet via Asset Management Group and SMT.		8 weeks
8.	Decision on transfer
9.	If Yes, negotiate final terms.		4 weeks
10.	Agree final Lease and Partnership agreement (if required) including monitoring arrangements.	Lease Partnership Agreement	26 weeks
11.	Transfer Asset

Appendix I - Community Asset Transfer Assessment

Question	Yes	No	SBC support required? Lead ?	Comments
Is it part of long term support to / engagement and partnership with the VCO?
Is it sustainable in the long term?
Are the terms and conditions reasonable and affordable?
Does it compliment the council strategy and priorities, allowing a comparison with open market disposal?
Have measurable outcomes of the disposal / asset been agreed and documented ( in the grant agreement?)
Can the community benefit be demonstrated under the Local Government Act 2002?
Has the proposed transfer been appraised alongside the options of The Council continues to run the asset/service; or Community Asset Transfer to a VCO; or Commercial tender of the asset/service; or Commercial disposal of the asset and alternative service provision made or the service ceases
Does the VCO have policies to support good governance? e.g. child protection, health and safety?
Does the VCO have a minimum of three trustees on its board?
Is there a requirement for a local councillor to be assigned to the VCO? In what capacity? Advisor Appointed person from the council Trustee/director
Does the VCO need capacity building support prior to the transfer of an asset?
What are the risks of: Service failure Misuse of assets Changes to any agreements made
Best possible transfer type: Leasehold freehold
Has an exit strategy been produced?

Appendix II - Two Year Schedule of assets for priority consideration of asset transfer - 2009/2011

Property	Primary reasons	Project sponsor
1. Thistle Hill Community Centre, Minster.	Opportunity to establish community management at the outset. Centre will be constructed and finished in Feb 2010	EDCS Unit
2. The Alexander Centre, Preston Street, Faversham.	Potential to access external capital funding. Interest from existing third sector organisation - Faversham Community Café and Resource Centre. Potential service revenue savings for the Council. Core group of regular users.	EDCS Unit
3. Bysingwood Community Hall, Wildish Road, Faversham.	Potential to access external funding. Inadequate space to meet present local needs and wants. Interest from existing third sector organization - West Faversham Community Association.	EDCS Unit
4. Wildish Road Open Space (Part) linked to the above property.	Potential to access external capital funding. Improves sustainability of above Hall business plan. Local demand for sports pitch.	EDCS Unit
5. Kemsley Concert Hall, Ridham Avenue, Kemsley.	Potential to access external capital funding Interest from Hall user group to develop a management body. Potential service revenue savings for the Council.	EDCS Unit
6. The Meads Community Centre.	Opportunity to establish community management at the outset. Part funding to construct the Centre is already available from planning gain and local expectations are high. Interest from existing third sector organisation - Bobbing Village Hall Trust.	EDCS Unit
7. Periwinkle Water Mill, Sittingbourne	Potential to access external funding, manage and allow public access to the site	EDCS Unit