Agenda item

To consider any decisions made by the Cabinet at its last meeting that have been called-in.

The Chairman informed the Committee that he had called in a decision made by the Cabinet at its meeting on 28^th September 2017 for consideration by the Scrutiny Committee in accordance with the Council’s Constitution.

The Chairman explained that he had taken this course of action because he felt that the Cabinet was inconsistent in its treatment of the Crediton Office in contrast to the disposal of Tiverton Town Hall (both acquisitions had been a result of the establishment of the Authority in 1974),  to the detriment of Crediton Town Council and its community.

The Chairman reminded the Committee that the result of the negotiations with Tiverton Town Council, as stated in the Minutes of the Cabinet of 5^th January, were that the Town Council agreed that they would purchase the Town Hall at a cost of £175k (half the price of the valuation), spreading the cost over a 6 year period with no interest payable.

He also informed the Committee that the recommendation by the Cabinet in respect of Crediton Office was:

1)    To dispose of the Crediton Office at the full market value (“thus providing an opportunity to maximise income and demonstrate value for money”)

2)    To notify the Land Charges service of the intention to sell the Crediton Office building and to inform the local community that the property had been registered as an asset of community value (with the risk “that the Town Council will be required to relocate”)

The Chairman added that there was no suggestion as to how that risk would be addressed or supported.

The Chairman said that ‘as I understand events, the previous Cabinet meeting of 31 August had before it an option that the building be offered to Crediton Town Council at half the then advised value on similar terms to Tiverton and that negotiations had been conducted with the Town Council to that effect, so much so that provision was made in the Crediton budget via an increased precept to meet the cost over a number of years, comparable to the Tiverton offer. However this potential outcome was deferred at the Cabinet meeting to allow for further information to be provided prior to a decision being made. Subsequently there was a modest increase in the advised valuation.  As a consequence, again as I understand, the Town Council was anxious that their asset could be potentially at risk and therefore applied for its recognition as an asset of community value. Why this application apparently lead to the termination of all previous discussions without the possibility of reaching a successful conclusion is unclear to me.  The Leader at the Cabinet meeting of 28^th September remarked that it changed the complexion of the negotiations, but did not give further explanation. Crediton Town Council would have wished to continue with negotiations. Certainly the Town Council would not have wanted to put any impediment in the way of achieving a successful outcome, irrespective of its resort to the safety net of an application as a community asset. That now seems to have been denied to them’.

He continued by saying ‘I have not been party to the negotiations and understandably my knowledge is incomplete. However, I believe the Cabinet decision would seriously diminish the range of services available to Crediton Town Council and its community, in sharp contrast to the treatment of Tiverton Town Council.

It is to address the sense of unequal treatment that I felt that more time was needed to explore the issues in more detail, as hitherto the Cabinet has always been even handed in its relationship with partner councils.

I would therefore wish the following to be considered:

1)    Whether, how and why the proposed outcome for the future of the Crediton Office changed in 2017 and whether such  change was justified on the evidence and information available

2)    Why the basis for the disposal of the Crediton Office differed from that made for the disposal of Tiverton Town Hall

3)    To understand what consultation has taken place with interested parties prior to the decision and the outcome of such consultation

4)    To look at the options put forward to Cabinet to examine the equality impact of such options and then to consider whether there were reasonable alternative options that were not considered.’

The Leader of the Council clarified that the resolutions from Cabinet had not included the words within the brackets in items 1) and d) of the Chairman’s summary of the resolution.

Cllr F W Letch, speaking on behalf of Crediton Town Council informed the Committee that the Town Council had carried out a feasibility study with a view to taking over the building.  They had considered registering the building as a community asset but at that stage were advised that there would be little point as they would most certainly be offered the building at half market value.  At an earlier Cabinet meeting the matter was deferred for future consideration.  The Town Council felt that this gave them time to put a plan in place, having expected the deal to be in line with that agreed with Tiverton Town Council.  Cllr Letch pointed out that Tiverton Town Hall had a market value and was currently used for weddings. Cllr Letch did not consider that Crediton and Tiverton had been treated in a similar manner due to differences regarding architectural surveys and whether the premises were considered to be viable for sale for commercial purposes. Crediton Town Council had expected to be offered the premises for use as a community building, for the use of the Town Council as well as Crediton Hamlets Parish Council and numerous other groups.  Cllr Letch urged Councillors not to ‘sell of the family silver and live to regret it’. 

The Director for Finance, Assets and Resources informed the Committee that at the Cabinet Meeting in July the agenda item regarding this matter had been deferred to allow officers to consider financial viability and they were advised that it was ‘borderline’ whereas Tiverton Town Hall had been considered to be of little or nil commercial viability due to the sums of investment needed in the building.  There were also differences regarding ongoing revenue and maintenance which for Tiverton were far in excess of those predicted for Crediton.  Financial regulations meant that the authority had to use due diligence when disposing of assets.  The main change since July had occurred when Crediton Town Council registered the building as a community asset.  Legislation meant that the Town Council and other bodies would have a six week period to register an interest in the premises and a further 6 months to raise funds for the purchase.

Cllr N A Way, who was also a member of the Town Council, stressed the importance of the building to the community and highlighted the number of community groups that used the premises since the Town Council had taken over running it.

Discussion took place regarding:

·       Inconsistencies in the disposal of assets over a number of years;

·       Legislation regarding community assets;

·       Parish Councils and community groups would be eligible to register for the premises;

·       The Asset Management Plan;

·       Negotiations would commence at full market value but legislation did not state the sale had to be at market value;

·       There would be subsequent decision points for the Cabinet regarding registration of interest and disposing of the asset:

The Chief Executive advised the committee that the Council now had to follow national regulations as per the legislation surrounding the disposal of community assets. Since the requirement to follow this approach was instigated by the actions of Crediton Town Clerk (on behalf of Crediton Town Council), he offered to write to her in order to understand their reasoning. However, the committee did not feel this was necessary.

It was RESOLVED that Members were satisfied with the information that had been provided and that the decision of the Cabinet taken in relation to this issue on 28 September 2017 should stand. Members recognised the responsibility of both Crediton Town Council and this authority to operate within the legislation laid down and to move forward in a proactive way.

(Proposed by the Chairman)

It was further RESOLVED that this Committee review procedures currently in place for the disposal of community assets to the market place, including a review of what had taken place in the past.

(Proposed by Cllr Mrs J Roach and seconded by Cllr N A Way)

Note: - i)       Report * previously circulated and attached to Minutes.

ii)        Cllr N A Way declared a personal interest as he was a member of Crediton Town Council.