Decision Maker: Cabinet
Decision status: Implemented
Is Key decision?: Yes
Is subject to call in?: No
To approve the outcome of the procurement
Cabinet had before it a *report of the Group Manager for Corporate
Property and Commercial Assets requesting the Cabinet to review the
results of the Tiverton Town Regeneration tender and requesting it
to reward the contract.
Chairman informed the meeting that it had become clear in recent
days that the members of the Cabinet required more detail with
regard to the overarching aims of the proposed works and the
financial considerations which would underpin them, there was a
need for the Cabinet to be comfortable with the information and
proposal prior to proceeding with a decision. There was no
intention to look at the tender process and there would be no
discussions with any of the bidders.
RESOLVED that the item
be deferred to allow for further discussions to take
(Proposed by the Chairman)
previously circulated, copy attached to minutes
Report author: Andrew Busby
Publication date: 23/09/2019
Date of decision: 19/09/2019
Decided at meeting: 19/09/2019 - Cabinet
This decision has been called in by:
Sally Gabriel who writes The decision has been called in by Cllr R B Evan s, R J Chesterton and B A Moore for the following reasons:
1, The decision that was not unanimously supported by cabinet fails to understand its significant negative impact when considering the stated council wide ambitions within the current and proposed strategy for regeneration of town centres made within the corporate plan and is contrary to the stated strategic aims of Mid Devon Council as a whole.
2, The decision has been set against a wish to seek views from a number of sections of society , however is clearly driven by the wishes of a small number of Tiverton Town Council planning committee members in particular as stated by individual members of cabinet on several occasions .
3, cabinet have failed to acknowledge documented evidence of previous wide ranging consultations that satisfied all consultation requirements.
4, cabinet have failed to offer a plan that can realistically off set the evident clash of priorities when full-council are asked to consider the future corporate plan at its meeting on 26th February 2020 with no measurable time line set for future decisions against this vital project, yet its delay is contrary to stated aims Within the the economic strategy of the MDDC plan.
5, Cabinet have failed to recognise the repetitional damage that can effect the council given their failure to show a clear economic commitment towards the town, this may possibly also manifest itself in reduced investment from other investors who may see MDDC’s cabinets continued dither and delay as systematic across a range of future investment opportunities.
6, Cabinet have failed to offer a viable alternative except a delay in any works towards the towns regeneration ambitions.
7, Cabinet have failed to consider the financial loss that is already known and continues to grow as each days delay adds to the cost of non action set against a known budgetary challenge over the coming months and years. These losses should be clearly and openly publicised too aid a decision that is enshrined in openness and transparency to aid informed debate.
The Deputy Monitoring Officers advice was sought in line with the Constitution and in their opinion the decision is not in breach of Article 15 and those that have called the decision are aware of this advice."