Issues

1) Independent advice to residents How is it ensured that this is truly independent?
2) Stock condition survey There now appears to be NO information about the results on the YourMK web site. We want a breakdown into structural and non-structural problems, and what was the brief to the surveyors
3) Freedom of Information YourMK claim that, as a Limited Liability Partnership, FOI can not be used to access their information. This may not be true as they are contracted by a local authority.
4) Trustworthness- 'We promise to be: Responsible - and will be held to account for our decisions and actions'. Will that be before or after the event? - 'We promise to be: Respectful'. On 26 April the press and media had been informed of the YourMK's Regeneration plans before the residents. If this is how YourMK treats the residents, then this is at the very least discourteous. - 'We promise to be: Involving - ...and respond appropriately to current and future needs'. What if YourMK think our needs are not worthwhile? - 'We promise to be: Empowering - ...providing residents with choice'. But will we be offered real choices? So far there has been no mention of refurbishment.
5) Historical Performance Have the Council houses been correctly maintained and upgraded while managed by MKC? Did the money in the Housing Revenue account get used for other purposes?
6) Current finance How does Mears get a return on investment for their capital in YourMK? Who will get rich from regeneration?

1) Value of existing property. Is regeneration depressing house prices on these estates, and, if so, how will home owners get the value they should from their homes?
2) Value of replacement properties. At the Tinkers Bridge meeting of 27 April 17, a scheme of partial ownership for replacement properties was outlined, where the price difference between the value of a demolished property and the replacement would be not owned, with no cost to the householder, but that percentage reclaimed on sale of the property. More details of the scheme are required.
3) Right to Buy. This scheme continues, but it is not clear how regeneration affects the condition of not selling the property for 5 years.
4) Property sizes. Comparison is needed on not just the internal area, but how useable is the area, and how much garden space is changed.

1)Council tenant rights. Where a tenant has a lifelong tenancy arrangement, this will continue. Link to where this is officially states is needed.
2)Improvements to properties. Where a tenant has improved their property, how will they receive compensation?
3)Property size. Any new property will be sized according the tenants' current requirements. Will this take into account relatives regularly staying, or lodgers who help the tenants' financial position?
4)Lodgers. No responsibility is taken for lodgers, so it appears they may become homeless with no realistic possibility of council housing

1) Health and deprivation measures The September 2016 publication "PHO Life expectancy milton keynes 2016" from Public Health England, records deprivation reducing life expectancy by 6.5 year for men and 6.3 years for women. It also records GCSE attainment levels are worse than average - so why not invest in education, rather than housing?
About 8% on the regeneration estates claim Disability Living Allowance, compared with 4.2% average for Milton Keynes - is this to be expected in areas build as 100% social housing, a link between financial poverty and disability? Is the life expectancy of disable people lower than average, so lowering the overall average on the regeneration estates?
2) Future uncertainty The Woughton estates face several more years on not knowing what is the long term plan, and so having difficulty making good decisions for the future.
3) Estate selection Three reasons have been given:1. 'large number of houses in poor condition' - Fullers Slade is not the largest estate with poor housing conditions. 2. 'potential scale of work necessary' - the data for this is not being issued 3. 'funding estimated to complete the work'- schemes to be s"commercially viable"
4) Regeneration focus of people Should this not mean supporting and strengthening community facilities in all 7 estates now? When YourMK was asked "what resources, including pressure on existing service providers, is YourMK able to provide to enhance the social facilities, especially in the estates where regeneration of property is not happening for some years?", the response was "The plans will be developed ... for Tinkers Bridge ... in 2020."