Last night’s Scrutiny committee meeting exposed two more examples of EDDC leaders’ instinct to make decisions without proper consultation.
The ubiquitous Cllr Phil Twiss (Conservative, Honiton St Michael’s) who, in addition to all his other roles, is portfolio holder for corporate relations, was summoned to explain why the democratic process had been so blatantly short-circuited by a council press release in September.
Cllr Cathy Gardner (Independent, Sidmouth Town) asked him why she and the other Sidmouth ward councillors had been taken by surprise by an announcement in the Sidmouth Herald that the Council was considering building affordable housing on Mill Street carpark. There had been no consultation with interested parties like the town council, and ward members were sent copies of the press release 14 minutes before it was published!
Cllr Twiss’ replied that he had not been involved with the release, (“It wasn’t me, guv”) but claimed it was a matter of urgency because a journalist had asked for a statement, and the deadline was pressing.
Cllr Marianne Rixson (Independent, Sidmouth Sidford) retorted that this sounded very much like “the journalist tail wagging the council dog” and it was no excuse for not consulting democratically before arbitrarily publishing controversial initiatives.
The Scrutiny Committee agreed and voted to remind Cabinet that there was a Protocol that councillors concerned should be consulted before press releases were authorised. It also welcomed guidance produced by the Communications Officer which made a similar point.
Silence remained about who had authorised the Sidmouth story but Cllr Bill Nash (Conservative Exmouth Town) may have been warm when he said only floods and other emergencies required urgent press releases. All other communications were non-urgent and should not be released if authorised only by “the Leader and senior officers.”
In passing, Cllr Nash also slammed the Council leadership for publishing detailed pictures and maps of developments along Queen’s Drive in Exmouth which were very different from any plans that had been consulted upon.
This was taken up by Scrutiny Chair Cllr Roger Giles (Independent, Ottery St Mary Town) who read a letter from two Exmouth residents complaining about pending planning applications for major works, including diverting Queen’s Drive, part of the latest, much altered, waterfront development scheme.
Exmouth Cllr Brenda Taylor (Lib Dem,Exmouth ) angrily commented that these plans proposed massive residential development which had never been agreed to by councillors. She felt she was “wasting her time” attending meetings when such arbitrary decisions were made in secret.
At this point the Democratic Services Officer and a Legal Officer intervened to argue that the Scrutiny Committee could not discuss the Waterfront Project because planning was outside its remit.
Cllr Rob Longhurst (Independent, Woodbury and Lympstone) wasn’t having any of this. “The reputation of EDDC is nil in Exmouth,” he said, because the current extravagant plans were being “justified” by a few hundred replies to a questionnaire about the different, more modest, “Splash” project.
Cllr Megan Armstrong (Independent, Exmouth Halsdon) agreed. “It’s not about planning, it’s about independent public consultation”, she said. It was about whether the people of Exmouth wanted or needed what the Council leadership was imposing on them.
Cllr Val Ranger (Independent, Newton Poppleford and Harpford) said it was quite within the remit of Scrutiny to look at questions of process, on “whether public consultation is being properly followed.”
The committee voted to do precisely that, once the current legal actions over Exmouth seafront businesses are resolved.
In the meantime, watch out for fireworks over Exmouth seafront at the full Council meeting on Wednesday 16th December.
At last a committee at EDDC talking sense on record!
LikeLike
I do wonder if the councilors realize just how much sand has accumulated on this area of proposed development.
This has amounted to some 100 tons which has been picked up with equipment along the front of the Swan and Jungle play area’s. This type of equipment will not be able to even have the room to operate between the different buildings planed.
Not only will this prove a big disadvantage for any retailer, should this development take place, who is to say that these problems will not be made worst by the future sea levels and weather conditions which have been forecast.
Very little has been said about this, but any responsible council should be taking these facts into account, if they do not then it will be those who should be held accountable.
LikeLike
Have you a problem with these comments, which are not being shown
LikeLike
No problem you just have to wait until they are moderated
LikeLike
E.D.W. Thanks for the answer and also printing these public concerns, can you tell me, are they past on or even read by EDDC .
I would presume they are very aware that this area has the worst intensity of sand of the whole sea front.
I can understand how any council would want to rid themselves of having this excessive costly problem, by passing it on to someone else. In the advent of having a Water Sport Area so near to the Beach, this could suffer the most.
Would i be right in saying that any sort of development of this size will need to have a management company who would cover the day to day running costs by charging every different unit, or what ever is decided, by yearly fee,s.
I can not visualize any council wanting to take on the responsibility for leases, or maintenance, so it will be an interest to any lease holders or retailers, and to us residents who will use the facilities, who will no doubt have to take into account how all these costs will be covered, should this large development go ahead.
LikeLike
They are passed on and we know that EDW is read by officers and councillors at EDDC!
LikeLike
Thank you, I do know councilors perhaps read them just to find out if they are being picked out for criticism or
sometimes praise. but only if they are passed on, i do not think they would be speculative enough to troll though web pages just to find out how dedicated and loyal we are to all those we voted for.
LikeLike