ALMO board sacked for suspending boss
A council has sacked the entire board of its arm’s-length management organisation after a row over its chief executive.
Last Thursday, Bury Council removed the board at Six Town Housing amid concerns over governance. The council was unhappy over the way the board had suspended the ALMO’s chief executive, Sharon McCambridge.
Ms McCambridge was suspended for a month following a number of allegations about her conduct. It is understood that the council did not believe the allegations were serious enough to merit a suspension.
The board had also changed its size without permission from the council.
Mark Sanders, chief executive at Bury council, said: ‘The council was concerned about its reputation and the reputation of Six Town Housing.’
Mr Sanders said the ALMO was still providing a very good service for tenants, and that his concerns related purely to the board. He added that there had been a number of other, smaller problems with the board which had led the council to take drastic action but he would not specify what the problems were.
A new interim board will serve until the ALMO’s annual general meeting in November, and an independent investigation is being held into the allegations levelled at Ms McCambridge. The investigator is expected to make a confidential report to the council on Friday this week.
Mike Kelly, chair of the interim board, said: ‘The interim board will work with staff at Six Town Housing to ensure that operational activities continue uninterrupted and in line with the key priorities for Six Town Housing, while addressing some of the governance issues which have come to light.’
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (13)
Anonymous | 26/05/2010 9:01 am
Its a shame the reporter did not get a comment from the Chair of the sacked board! Does it also mean the Ms McCambridge is back at work?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Editor's comments
We are trying to contact various other people in relation to this story, and will publish more information when we can.
Terence J Edwards | 26/05/2010 9:55 am
I am not surprised over this report I was dismissed from fan Almo board ,and they used three different proceeders to achieve it
As a board member you have no right of appeal ,in truth it is impossible to defend yourself at a Kangaroo court asI am sure the Lady found out
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
| 26/05/2010 12:53 pm
Of course the fact that Bury Council is run by the Tories and the ALMO was chaired by a Labour councillor has nothing to do with it! This whole "arms length" proposition is becoming more laughable by the day. There is nothing "arms length" about an ALMO. They are all just the council's housing department with a new coat of paint and the tick box illusion of "resident involvement" in the form of so-called "board members". Who can't even do what a board member in a proper company can do - appoint and remove the management. What really is the point of them? The council own the properties and are in total control at all times. The entire ALMO concept was a fudge from the start and is looking increasingly untenable as council's seek to make savings in the form of management costs.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Sancho | 26/05/2010 2:40 pm
ILAG, for once, you and I agree. ALMOs, in 90% of cases, are purely a vehicle for obtaining money to meet Decent Homes. A total waste of everyone's time and money.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 26/05/2010 5:42 pm
ALMO's are only Arms Length when it suits the Council for them to be so. The Board of Six Town Housing must have felt that the allegations against Ms McCambridge were serious enough to warrant a suspension and should have stood by the Boards decision on this as long as the investigation and the ensuing report were independently and fairly carried out. It will be interesting to see if the Council make the independent report public.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 26/05/2010 6:56 pm
So is Council happy to confirm that it does not believe allegations of bullying are serious?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 26/05/2010 8:17 pm
RIP Almo - not long for this world.
Ah, the Holy Grail of tenant empowerment ... another Labour euphemism offering nothing but a delusion.
It's not the first time, its happened. I seem to remember Island Homes in the Isle of Dogs got shot of its entire board when they attempted to say something interesting.
I'll bet within the year most almos will have collapsed.
With the delusion costing up to £1m a pop a year to maintain, pressure on the housing budget, more pressure on the housing revenue account, common sense is going to prevail.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
mr concerned | 26/05/2010 8:35 pm
The chief executive will return to work on June 1st,evidently the council does not take bulleying seriously.
This story will run and run,watch this space.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
| 27/05/2010 1:47 am
I note mr concerned put up the press release link in the forum section. Check out
http://www.sixtownhousing.org/News/Article/PRESSRELEASEFROMBURYCOUNCIL/
All the "interim" board members are council officers including the so-called "independent" board members who are ex-council officers. What a coup. The laughable world of local government cronyism never ceases to amaze...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 27/05/2010 9:22 pm
It is interesting to read what the Council have to say on this matter, in fact in other statements that they have made in other publications they refer to the supposed faults of the Board which go uninvestigated and unproven but still keep coming out in the public domain despite the damage they may do to the ex Board members and ALMOs reputation.
It is also interesting to see the ex Board being criticised when it was, infact the Board that arranged for the independent investigation to be carried out in a discreet and confidential matter and only when the Council get involved do half the world find out, which can only be damaging to everyone involved.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment