As the home to one of the most prestigious universities in the world Cambridge has a reputation for academic excellence. However this does not seem to extend all the way into the City Council's decision-making processes, where a refresher course in maths seems to be called for.
A news story in Cambridge First explains how the Council has decided not to employ an empty homes officer. The housing strategy team leader is reporrted as saying "Clearly it would be nice to have [a dedicated officer] but I don’t think we can justify it.”. Cambridge apparently had 389 long-term empties in December.
It's generally acknowledged that a 3 days a week is the minimum viable resource for a dedicated empty homes officer post. If the full cost-to-employ is somewhere around £25k a year for a 3-day a week role, that equates to bringing 3 long-term band "D" empties back into use per annum - hardly a stretching target. That's completely leaving aside all the other benefits such as the housing gain, the improvement in the local environment, the reduction in nuisance and all the other beneficial resutls of empty homes interventions that have enouraged forward-thinking authorities to investg in empty homes speciallists over the years.
Of course, this does not mean that Cambridge is doing nothing about empty homes - in fact the stroy mentions a target of 80. It is just that there is plenty of evidence that the most successful and focused empty homes initiatives are always associated with the work of dedicated officers.