Agenda item

To receive any questions relating to items on the agenda from members of the public and replies thereto.

A Question was received and read out by the Chairman from Roger Davey:

In April of last year the overspend on the Riverside development of the unsightly blocks of flats and houses which disfigure the riverside, was quoted as just over three quarters of a million pounds.  Given that in September last year the council gave 3 Rivers a further 2.2 million to keep it afloat my questions are :-

No.1

Given the continuing haemorrhage of public funds to 3 Rivers, how many more millions of pounds of council tax payer’s money does the council intend to plough into 3 Rivers?

No.2 Given that it is obvious that the council and some of its officers are incapable of controlling the expenditure on 3 Rivers will the council bring in some forensic accountants or other external body to examine all of the accounts , contracts  and any  other documents associated with this company.

No.3

Of especial concern must be the way in which the original multi million pound contract for the Riverside site was awarded to EBC (who later pulled out) after a cosy chat, without going out to tender. This is a flagrant breach of the public procurement regulations which 3 Rivers are bound by as a company owned by the council. These regulations insist on at least 3 companies being invited to tender. Even if the councils usual contractors do not wish to tender there are many national firms who I am sure would have tendered had they been asked. Instead the contract was awarded "on a design and build contract 2016 following negotiations with a contractor".  This is the response from my freedom of information request to 3 Rivers in 2019. This alone especially as a councillor and a council officer were directors of 3 Rivers at the time, is I believe another breach of the regulations and surely warrants further investigation by an external body. Why was the contract awarded in this way ?

No.4

Given 3 Rivers record thus far how can the council be sure that the costs for the Bampton and Park road developments are realistic and will not lead to the council taxpayers being saddled with yet more debt?

No.5

Given that this meeting is closed to the people who pay, if and when will the council release all of the information regarding 3 Rivers and the ongoing Riverside site fiasco?

The Chairman thanked Mr Davey for their questions and noted that answers would be submitted in writing. 

A Question was received from Paul Elstone:

Question 1

There is an increasing level of public concern over the financial arrangement between the Council and 3 Rivers, including the HIGH debt levels and the impairment of loans. These concerns are borne out by the demonstration outside of Phoenix House this evening and recent press articles, Once more, a meeting about 3 Rivers will be held in secret. For transparency, can the voting tonight be conducted in public with individual votes recorded?

Question 2

External Auditors Grant Thornton have just published a report that identifies problems with 3 Rivers. A write-down of work in progress of £1.6 million, an overstated Tax deferment of nearly £500,000 increasing the loss provision on St Georges Court by £222,000. This is in addition to the already declared £790,000 impairment on the Council’s books. Why can’t Council see this Company is in increasingly serious trouble?

Question 3

Scrutiny Committee on Monday were told that the Council will not now fund 3 Rivers from external borrowing but will continue to do this from Council funds. With the over £900,000 budget cuts being asked for, how can the Council afford this?

Question 4

When given 3 Rivers current project delivery record. Cost exposures, and impaired loans, all available property development loan market evidence shows that the Council are providing highly preferential interest rates and loan terms to its own Company.

That 3 Rivers are unable to lend from the market something confirmed by the then Cabinet Member for Finance at Cabinet on 6 September 2022. Are the Council worried about the risk of being accused of giving 3 Rivers a significant commercial advantage in any tendering process, especially where public money is involved?

Question 5

Can the S151 Officer both confirm beyond any doubt that there will be no risk of a section 114 Notice being issued as a result of the Council’s involvement with 3 Rivers?

The Chairman thanked Mr Elstone for their questions and noted that answers would be submitted in writing. 

A Question was received from Belinda Boyles:

Why are you not busy concentrating on affordable houses for people like myself? Also, I would like to know why it is so hard to be prioritised, I lived in Bampton all my life, 34 years, I’ve got 2 children sharing a bedroom, a boy and a girl. I have been on the system for 3 years now and I am finding it very hard to believe that my best chance of being able to bring my children up the right way is to move to all the way Plymouth. Where I am likely to get a 3 bedroom house which obviously I need. I just believe that the system is not running as it should.

Cllr R J Chesterton explained that there was a building programme in place, with a site in Tiverton for 70 council houses to be built for social rent and to passive house standards, with other sites planned. Other sites for small scale development across the Mid Devon were being sought. In addition, there was concern over the weighting for local priority through the Devon Home Choice system. A motion had been raised for the next ordinary Full Council meeting which sought to address the current Devon Home Choice system. 

A Question was received from Rachel Kelland:

I don’t actually live in a council property I am somebody that obviously earns a substantial amount of money between me and my partner and we live in private rented accommodation which is obviously excruciate as you can imagine. I think its okay you sat there saying about all these developments and everything going up but where is it about the locals staying local? Because apart of housing and as far as I get it from the Devon Home Choice and about the housing that was obviously allocated around local areas it was actually under the assumption that local people could stay local. Whereas obviously Belinda here has obviously been waiting for a property for over 3 years and other properties have become available which she been able to bid on but people in like Taunton or anywhere else has obviously been given these properties over certain people who have stayed local, obviously it is not just Belinda or other people that are obviously in this criteria and obviously I understand that obviously you know other people have different circumstances to why they would need a property over somebody else which is absolutely fine but in the same ball court where is the locals staying local?

Cllr RJ Chesterton explained that it was Devon Home Choice who decide the allocations, with a cascading criteria being used. The motion that had been submitted requested a review which would highlight if enough emphasis was put on local need. If Devon Home Choice had not followed protocol this would also be highlighted in the review.

A Question was received from Philip McShell:

I live in Bampton in a council property, bungalow, I was quite infuriated just a moment ago and thought I have to say something for this lady behind me with her 2 children, one is 5 years of age and one is 13 and I just want to comment to the gentleman who stood up and spoke in regard to what the Council are doing and incentives and things. I just wanted to ask how long does this lady have to wait her children are 5 years of age and her other child is 13, how old will they be when problems like this are fixed? People with a situation like this need support and help now, it’s no point them waiting year on year out, you know, what reassurance can the Council give to people like this, a young mum struggling to bring up 2 children. What reassurance can the Council give?

Cllr R J Chesterton explained that it difficult for individual cases to be discussed in a public meeting and that if they wanted issues to be raised they were encouraged to get in contact with their Ward Member and the Cabinet Member for Housing.