To receive any questions relating to items on the agenda from members of the public and replies thereto.
Minutes:
Mr Wilce – referring to Minute 60 of the Cabinet report stated that the council is only just coming to the end of the town centre relief road consultation and that being the case what evidence was supplied to Homes England in order to demonstrate significant local support for the project which is a condition of the application?
Referring to the report of the Licensing Committee, I note from the minutes that Councillor Busch has attended a meeting at last; does the Council agree with me that electors have the right to expect their elected representative to attend more than two meetings in six months?
Mr Collier referring to agenda item 6 on the agenda (Petitions) stated - I am a long term resident of Crediton, I have a number of questions about the sale of the old MDDC offices in Crediton which I will now outline.
1. Please confirm that the identity of the prospective purchaser was not known to either council members or officers before the decision was made to sell to him?
2. Please confirm the date of exchange of contracts?
3. Please advise on what grounds three Cabinet Members decided to sell to the purchaser who has now exchanged contracts when they were fully aware that Crediton Town Council wished to purchase the building and a majority of MDDC councillors also wished the building to be sold to Crediton Town Council?
4. Please explain why contracts have now been exchanged in the full knowledge of the ongoing dissatisfaction in Crediton and knowing that a debate on the matter was due at this council meeting?
5. Please explain how the decision made was actually a democratic decision?
Cllr Mrs Brooks-Hocking again referring to Item 6 on the agenda stated - can the Leader of the Council please confirm that this Council understands that the registration of the building of the Town Council offices in Crediton an asset of community value meant that the community of Crediton valued the building and wanted to keep it. Does the council also understand the legislation in the Localism Act related to registering an asset of community value? Does the council understand that the Localism Act allows the District Council to sell to the Town Council at any time during the moratorium period?
Mrs Stephens again referring to Item 6 on the agenda stated - thank you for allowing us the opportunity to ask questions. I don’t bring this one just from myself I bring it from a lot of people in Crediton. Each week I speak to many residents, many of them are unable to get to the District council meetings due to the timings of your meetings and also the location. There is no public transport from Crediton to Tiverton. This significantly affects those that are interested in having a town council building. I wonder if members of the MDDC Cabinet are proud of the decision that they took to sell off the town council offices in Crediton and after the prayer this evening do you still have a good conscience in that decision? This decision was made clearly against a very high percentage of the electorate, MDDC councillors and scrutineering. The decision is also taken against the backdrop of another one of MDDC’s or presumably just the Cabinet, to increase the housing in Crediton in the immediate future thus raising the population by some 25% whilst selling off the council office diminishing the amenities to the town. In light of the decision taken by just three Cabinet members to sell Crediton town council office and that the Cabinet did not take into consideration the wishes of this full MDDC or take into consideration Scrutiny’s comments. This comes from a number of residents in Crediton why are we paying our council tax to pay for all of you sit here, 40 people, who are unable to influence a decision which has been dictated by three members of Cabinet. If the full council were reduced to three Cabinet members who appear to make all the decisions to us from Crediton on MDDC, what would be the annual saving and why are we paying for full council? Why are you all sat here giving your time for us if you have no jurisdiction and no influence on decisions made by the Cabinet. Therefore what would be that annual saving?
Mr Stephens again referring to Item 6 stated that regarding the intended sale of Crediton Town Council offices by MDDC, as an ordinary member of the public I have but little understanding of the workings of local government, perhaps I should say not workings of local government. But as an ordinary voter contemplating where to place my cross next May this is how the narrative quite simply seems to be. For decades Crediton owned a superbly functioning office building serving a multiplicity of community functions as well as modestly fulfilling the functions of our Rathaus or Hotel De Ville for the hundreds of visitors from more than 18 countries worldwide including the USA, Japan, Australia and New Zealand such is those who have signed in the visitors book in the Parish Church in the last 10 months alone. Now it seems the Mayor of Avranches will have to be welcomed in the alleyway of number 8A North Street. I wondered if Cabinet bothered to ascertain that Crediton is probably more famous abroad than it is in the UK due to St Boniface. In the Local Government reorganisation in 1974 the ownership of the building was transferred to the MDDC presumably not as inherited silverware but in trust to protect the usage. MDDC decides to raise the cash by selling off the silverware, Crediton tries to save it by offering on comparable terms to Tiverton. MDDC full council vote is unopposed even by the Cabinet members to support the Crediton bid. Cabinet exerts its vested powers to ignore that vote. Crediton presents a strong petition to full MDDC and is told MDDC has no power to overrule the Cabinet. Along with several other residents I wrote to the MP Mel Stride and am told that he has no power overturn the Cabinet decision. Crediton residents increased their petition to around 25-35% of the electorate and speak to the Scrutiny Committee. Scrutiny Committee say they have no power over the Cabinet but would write a letter, which I applaud, imploring the decision and requesting for the second time a rethink. Cabinet continues on its unhinged path, at no point offering qualitative rationale only the divine right of Kings. Cabinet sells the building. Mr Chairman when I cast my vote I placed my trust in the elected council thus expressing confidence in them to make good decisions. Until this issue arose I did not know that MDDC delegated powers to Cabinet to make decisions for them let alone to relinquish any power over those decisions. Presumably the full MDDC is basing a similar trust and confidence in their selected Cabinet to make good decisions and retain responsibility for those decisions made on their behalf. As a voter I carry a proportionate responsibility for the actions of those for whom I vote. At the Scrutiny Committee on Monday 8th October the sale of the Crediton Town Council offices was described as a very bad decision. All we have back from every avenue above a Gallic shrug of the shoulders is ‘we have no power to make the Cabinet change its decision’. Ensuing from this bizarre lack of control my question is as follows:
As a member of the electorate I will have the opportunity to exert my responsibility in the ballot box next May will MDDC exert its responsibility now for the actions of its own Cabinet members by moving a vote of no confidence in them?
Mrs Briant Evans again referring to Item 6 stated that -Crediton Town office building serves the greater Crediton district not just the town. What arrangements I wonder were made for public consultation about the sale of the building to include those rural parishes which see Crediton as their local business centre and hub. There appears to be no indication of how this might have happened or how the impact on the rural area has been assessed and/or discussed as part of the decision making process which is recorded in the public minutes of the Cabinet meeting of 14th June.
Mrs J Tucker again referring to Item 6 on the agenda stated - my question is somewhat similar to those which have gone ahead in that you have now finally sold Crediton’s most vital civic and community asset to a private buyer but actually as others have remarked it was not this council that decided to sell but just three members of one small committee who decided like Shakespeare’s shylock to have their pound of flesh out of Crediton regardless of the consequences. They ignored the wishes of the majority of this council, the advice of the Scrutiny Committee, elements of your constitution and finally our petition. And nobody could stop them. This was a travesty of democracy, a betrayal of the electors of Mid Devon and has bought this council into contempt and ridicule. You mention that to people in Crediton and you’ll know that’s true. What are you going to do about it, which is my question? What are you going to do to restore democracy to Mid Devon to ensure that none of your committees is ever beyond the power of the whole council and thereby one would hope ensure that no other community in Mid Devon can suffer the sort of damage which has been inflicted on Crediton.
Mrs M Nation again referring to Item 6 asked:
1. When is the completion date of the sale?
2. I firmly believe that there’s been a breach of natural justice on the assumption that most of the council also believe that. What are the proposals to remedy the situation and to prevent the same thing happening again perhaps to another authority?
3. When I become a District Councillor I can remember that when you get involved, the Chief Executive firmly says to you any decision you make is for the district as a whole. How can the Cabinet justify their decision to treat Crediton so differently than Tiverton Town Council and how do they think that the people of Crediton and district will regard their decision in the future?
Mrs C Penharris referring to Minute 60 of the Cabinet report stated that the CCA which is Cullompton Community Association have many concerns about the process and the deliverance of the consultation on the proposed Cullompton Relief Road. Here are some examples:
Mixed information was given out at the consultation where MDDC officers, a consultant and councillors were advising members of the public that option C was not an option due to the time limit and cost. The road was needed to improve air quality where according to the MDDC air quality report 2018, it is recorded the greatest decrease in nitrogen dioxide in sites 12 & 13 and is below the national average. It was said that the Garden Village might not happen because planning had not been agreed but according to your air quality report the Garden Village site and the land is secure. Other comments heard were that the relief road would alleviate traffic from the town centre and make way for more traffic from the new developments and we will have to look at making improvements to junction 28. Another concern is on the on-line questionnaire, you have to answer all the questions to allow it to submit, even if you put no to the relief road. My question is because of these concerns, along with the non-delivery of leaflets, which members of the public were advised would happen, and which only a small minority received, do you agree that the consultation was greatly flawed and skewed and if not why not?