The Overview and Scrutiny Committee met on Thursday, 5th February 2026, to conduct pre-decision scrutiny on the procurement of a leisure operator for the council's leisure facilities and to reconsider the disposal of properties at Union Yard, Aldershot. The committee discussed the proposed leisure operator contract, focusing on pricing, performance targets, and maintenance responsibilities, and reviewed the disposal of Blocks C & D at Union Yard, Aldershot, considering financial implications and market valuations.

Farnborough Leisure Centre - Leisure Operator Procurement

The committee carried out pre-decision scrutiny on the procurement and approval of an operator for the Aldershot Pools and Lido, Alpine Snowsports Centre, and the proposed new Farnborough Leisure Centre. The report presented outlined the outcome of a procurement process that commenced in June 2025, with a 60% weighting for quality and 40% for cost. Operators had the option to bid for either a standard concession contract or an agency agreement.

During the discussion, councillors raised several key questions. Regarding membership fees, it was noted that the preferred bidder had proposed a pricing model designed to ensure equitable access and commercial performance, with annual price increases benchmarked against Sport England and user feedback, and subject to annual Council agreement. The implications of not meeting performance targets were addressed, with the council retaining an agreed minimum financial return that was guaranteed. The financial implications of mechanical or plant failure at the Lido were clarified, with responsibility for maintenance remaining with the Council. Car parking capacity at the Aldershot Pools and Lido was identified as an ongoing issue, with existing measures including a new overflow car park, utilisation of Aldershot Park, and occasional use of the Crematorium car park during busy periods. The committee also sought assurances on holding the preferred operator accountable for promises of social value, with provisions to be included in the contract terms. The costs associated with the procurement process were discussed, noting a contract with Portsmouth Council for procurement work alongside Rushmoor officers. Community outreach was also a point of discussion, with target areas of multiple deprivation identified, though these were noted as negotiable. The committee also discussed rebuilding relationships with local clubs, particularly swimming and synchronised swimming clubs, and was informed that the project team had engaged with key stakeholders, including these clubs, throughout the process.

Following the discussion, the committee requested that David Phillips, Deputy Head of Operations, confirm any penalties for contract failure by the operator, whether the Council should request a performance bond from the preferred operator, and confirm that appropriate balance sheet checks had been undertaken for the preferred operator.

Union Yard, Aldershot - Disposal of Blocks C & D

The committee reconsidered the decision made by the Cabinet on 15th December 2025, to dispose of Blocks C & D at Union Yard, Aldershot to Vivid Housing. It was noted that since the Cabinet meeting, key project dependencies had changed, and Vivid Housing's Board decision was now anticipated in mid-February. The committee heard from Chris Hodgkinson of Lambert Smith Hampton (Investment Management) (LSH), who presented findings from recent soft market testing on the value of Blocks C & D. Mr Hodgkinson reported that six companies had submitted offers, all of which were below the value offered by Vivid Housing, leading LSH to recommend proceeding with the sale to Vivid Housing.

The committee discussed the financial implications of selling to Vivid Housing compared to alternative options outlined in Exempt Report No. REG2502. While red book valuations were used as a benchmark, it was explained that a property's actual sale value is determined by what the market is willing to pay at the time. Soft market testing generally reflects true value, although off-market sales can occasionally lead to over or under valuations. Members asked and received responses to questions regarding the specifics of the sale.

The potential for selling the properties individually on the open market was also discussed, with differing views on the potential income. It was noted that a piecemeal disposal, which could take 14-21 months, would incur additional costs during the sales process compared to a single sale of both blocks. Although the total capital receipt from individual disposals could be higher, this would need to be offset against increased holding costs and was considered a higher risk than the immediate benefit of a larger single capital receipt.

Executive Director Karen Edwards stated that Option 4(a) from Exempt Report No. REG2502, which was the original preferred disposal option in April 2025, had been withdrawn. The current offer from Vivid Housing was the quickest to progress in line with the Council's Financial Recovery Programme and would help minimise further costs associated with holding the property. The mix of properties and restrictions on the commercial units had also been adjusted during negotiations. Affordable housing nominations would align with the Council's current arrangements, addressing the number of residents on the housing list, while shared ownership would be managed by Vivid Housing. In response to a query regarding anti-social behaviour (ASB) and concerns about Vivid Housing's perceived inaction, it was stated that strategic-level meetings were being held to address these concerns effectively. Members were informed that 18 units were already occupied by Vivid tenants, with no ASB issues reported to date. The committee noted the financial implications of not proceeding with the sale to Vivid Housing.

The committee discussed relevant financial and social points but made no specific recommendations to the Cabinet.