Auditors say EDDC “will continue to find it difficult to afford its spending plans against further government spending cuts” say auditors

“Going forward, the Council will continue to find it difficult to afford its spending plans against further government spending cuts, the added pressure of inflationary increases in costs and pay awards, continued low investment income, an increasing call on services, members’ ambitions to enhance and improve services and the wish to keep to moderate increases in Council Tax and other fees and charges.”

Click to access 220916-agenda-item-8-combined-reports.pdf

And no word yet if they have signed off last year’s accounts “after a formal objection was received from a local elector. We are in the process of considering this objection, which relates to the Council’s approach to recording and obtaining receipt of monies due to it from developers through agreements under s106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.

Messy situation for the next meeting of the Audit and Governance Committee.

EDDC isn’t like John Lewis (“Never knowingly undersold)!

Letter in today’s Sidmouth Herald:

Cllr Barlow rightly castigates the developers of the 36 Churchill homes for their measly offer towards affordable homes in the light of the profits likely to be made. How much more profit will PegasusLife make from 115 apartments at Knowle, but in this case without any payment at all towards affordable homes? What is more, EDDC have, I believe, “knowingly undersold” the site, including parts of the public park, to pay towards an unnecessary re-location, so that PegasusLife are likely, according to some estimates, to make a net profit of around £26 million. And because of the inadequate care to be provided, this development will very likely put great strain on already threatened local health services. Or does PegasusLife expect most of the apartments to become second homes for the extremely wealthy, as there is apparently nothing apart from cost to prevent this? Either way, is this what Sidmouth needs?

Readers may also like to know that, since they sent in their objections to the Knowle development, well over 50 new documents have been submitted by PegasusLife (in August and on 27 October). Some of these contradict earlier and misleading artist-impressions and show new details and changes including drainage problems upon which people may wish to comment. Comments should reach the planning department by November 11 as the application is likely to be put to the Development Management Committee on December 6.

Michael Temple Sidmouth

Unitary councils “save money” … yet a few years ago – they didn’t!

Owl is confused.

A few years ago, EDDC spent more than £250,000 to persuade us – and the Government – that they should NOT be forced to amalgamate into, basically, a “Greater Exeter” OR a unitary authority.

NOW:

We have East Devon District Council

We have Devon County Council

We have Greater Exeter – EDDC, Mid-Devon, Teignbridge and Exeter Councils – the very thing EDDC fought only a few years ago

We have STRATA – an IT partnership between EDDC, Teignbridge and Exeter but NOT Mid-Devon

We have the Local Enterprise Partnership – all of Devon and all of Somerset

AND

Research apparently reveals that unitary councils could save several billion pounds:

Creating 27 unitary councils across the whole of England could save as much as £2.9bn, according to an independent analysis of local government reorganisation options undertaken for the County Councils Network.

The report by consultants EY examined six different single and two-tier governance scenarios for county and district authorities, using existing county boundaries. Based on the analysis of national data, EY found that creation of unitaries along county boundaries could save between £2.37bn and £2.86bn over five years, and average up to £106m per county. The single unitary option has the shortest payback period, generating savings within two years and two months, according to the review. …”

Owl’s head hurts…

“Further 28 documents on Knowle submitted by Pegasus Life. Deadline for comments 11th November 2016”

Someone is in a hurry …. could an EDDC/PegasusLife deadline be nearing? And are these major or minor amendments? Major amendments need to go through the planninf process and DMC. Putting through major amendments as minor ones coyld give grounds for a judicial review …

The District Council has received more amendments to the Planning Application (ref 16/0872/MFUL) for Knowle. They consist of Pegasus Life’s revised drainage and bat mitigation reports, together with amendments to the design and footprint of building E and the associated landscaping.

DEADLINE for COMMENTS is FRIDAY 11th NOVEMBER, 2016.

The plans and Design Access Statement show (a) that Building E is moved very slightly north with planting around it (not a major change) and (b) Pegasus are arguing that the summerhouse is already shrouded in vegetation (how has this occurred?) and that views from the south will remain largely unaffected. The revised Drainage and Bat statements are lengthy, requiring close attention.

Please note that the 28 new documents are proving slow to download from the EDDC website http://planning.eastdevon.gov.uk/online- applications/.

Alternatives,and instructions for commenting, are given in this extract from the notification e-mail circulated by EDDC on 28 October 2016.(NB.Highlighting in bold added by SOS):

‘Alternatively, they can be seen at the Council Offices, Knowle, Sidmouth between 8.30am and 5.00pm Monday to Friday. If you wish to make any representations about the proposal, you can do so on the website or write to us at East Devon District Council Offices, Knowle, Sidmouth quoting the application no. 16/0872/MFUL by 11 November 2016. Please mark the letter for the attention of the Central Team and copy your letter to the relevant Parish or Town Council. You should be aware that any comments raised will become public knowledge.’

Contact for the planning team : planningcentral@eastdevon.gov.uk Tel: 01395 516551

Further 28 documents on Knowle submitted by Pegasus Life. Deadline for comments 11th November 2016

And Councillor Moulding might be advised to watch his words too!

On the question of hospital Moulding says in this week’s Midweek Herald that EDDC’s health scrutiny committee should examine the CCG’s audited accounts.

The Scrutiny Committee isn’t even allowed to see EDDC’s own accounts and information for things like relocation, let alone ask for and scrutinise other people’s!

And aren’t this years EDDC accounts being held up by auditors who have not yet signed them off (due in September) as they are not happy that some £700,000 plus of Section 106 money seems to be a problem area?

Don’t do as we do, do as we say?

People in glass houses would be well advised not to throw stones

An EDDC district councillor recently talking about NHS bed cuts:

The CCG uses inaccurate logic and biased consultation questions, therefore it’s not a real consultation – it’s an act of manipulation.”

An independent councillor? No – true blue Honiton Tory councillor Mike Allen,

Come on, Mike – you’ve been a Tory councillor at EDDC for years – surely you shouldn’t start complaining about these tactics now!

Biased questions – go to any regeneration area or anywhere Section 106 funds are being discussed: “You can have this or that”, “But we want the other!”, “Well, you can’t have it – it’s not on the form and we don’t want it.”

Real consultation? Name one EDDC consultation that didn’t have people up in arms.

Manipulation includes bending with the wind … remember the good old days when you were Chair of the Local Plan panel and refused to let the Ottery (independent) councillor speak about his ward on a crucial part of the plan? Biased? Maybe, maybe not – though Owl recalls you were rapped on the knuckles for that one.

Remember the good old East Devon Business Forum meetings that you attended?

Oh, and you can’t have inaccurate logic – it’s either logical or it isn’t.

Time to wake up and smell the … well, it certainly isn’t coffee.

Whatever happened to … Knowle relocation costs?

Given that Exmouth’s regeneration plan costs have more than doubled from £1.5m to £3.2m (see below) and part of that cost is said to be the development costs rising, whatever happened to Knowle relocation costs?

First it was going to be cost neutral …
Then it was going to cost an extra £4 million …
The latest estimate (some time ago) had the extra cost at £9.7 million

Since then:

… labour costs have increased (minimum wage rise)
… skilled labour is less available (migrants choosing not to come or being sucked into Hinkley C, our older skilled workers retiring and not being replaced by youngsters with the required training due to skills gap)
… imported raw materials costs have risen enormously due to the falling pound
… Community Infrastructure Levy to be paid

Of course, EDDC could build prefab offices to keep down costs, just as the government intends to do with housing …

Suddenly Knowle looks much more attractive in that bright autumn sun, with its lovely park and the view of the sea …

Oh, wait … it’s been flogged off for luxury retirement housing.

EDDC planning leaflet on what to do if build quality of new homes is bad

Cabinet meeting 9 November 2016, 17.30
Agenda Item 10

“Cabinet are asked to defer a decision on recommendation Minute 13 Recommendation 2 “that the Officers consider the resource and
financial implications for EDDC on the production of a leaflet giving advice to purchasers of new homes, on options available to them if issues arise regarding the quality of the build”; until further research has been undertaken by the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management.”

Click to access 091116combinedcabagenda-sm.pdf

QUESTION: Isn’t Building Control supposed to pick up poor build quality?
QUESTION: Should local authority searches identify poor quality buildings if the local authority knows this is the case?
QUESTION: Where are these poor quality homes and why are they not being identified?

Exmouth overspend and its worrying ramifications

See agenda item 16 – pages 81 – 91 of papers for next Cabinet meeting on 9 November:

Of particular note:

· The budget estimate rising from £1.5m to £3.12m

· As per 2.1 and 2.2 – a planning application for phases 2 and 3 is being submitted, as a ‘technical exercise’ to sustain the planning application (as the outline would be due to expire). [Is this allowed?]

· As quoted on page 84 ‘The planning authority will seek responses from the public to the planning application but the Council itself is not proposing to go beyond this with additional consultation for this technical exercise’.

· Consultation is then mentioned as coming after the technical exercise, in language used to imply consultation will be thorough (despite missing the important issue of consultation needing to happen before decisions are made!).

· Having told the tenants of the Harbour View (in a public meeting) that the Harbour View will be considered a separate application, and framing it to sound altruistic and caring of them, they now state that the Regeneration board has considered marketing the Harbour View site BEFORE the rest of the site in recognition of its value!”

… Loads more in there, makes awful reading.

Click to access 091116combinedcabagenda-sm.pdf

Residents want clarification of Knowle housing designation

An EDDC spokesperson says it will be up to the DMC to decide classification but then says there are legal aspects to be considered.

The DMC are laypersons- surely they are not qualified to take such decisions?

“District chiefs have yet to decide how the use of a proposed 115-home retirement community at Knowle should be classified.

The Knowle Residents’ Association this week called for clarity on the matter. Householders say that, if the development ends up classed as ‘C3’ – housing – developer PegasusLife will need to either include ‘affordable’ homes on-site, or pay towards them.

If it is care accommodation [C2], the group says the development will be even further from the 50 homes the site is allocated in East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) Local Plan.

Residents’ association chairman Kelvin Dent said the group is ‘amazed’ the authority has not decided what use class the development falls into. He added: “Our view is that the application is akin to housing – albeit with the occupants of the proposed apartments being able to purchase a package of care to suit their needs.

“Under planning law, this equates to a C3 use and PegasusLife will be obliged to provide social housing as part of their development or to make a substantial financial contribution towards the social housing that Sidmouth desperately needs and support for the local community.

“We look forward to receiving confirmation from EDDC that they agree and will be helping local young people to find a home.”

A spokeswoman for EDDC – which intends to relocate from the Knowle HQ to Exmouth and Honiton – said officers had been working on the basis that the development’s use would be C2.

She added: “However, officers have been considering whether the form and layout of the proposed development and the manner in which it is proposed to operate would constitute a C2 use or not.

“In considering this issue, officers have been, and continue to consider, the views expressed by residents and relevant case-law.”

The spokeswoman said the officers’ conclusions on PegasusLife’s application will likely be presented to EDDC’s development management committee (DMC) on December 6. The agenda will be published 10 days beforehand.

She added: “Ultimately, a decision on this issue is for the members of DMC to make.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/residents_call_for_clarity_over_future_knowle_use_1_4756297

Quiz Hernandez at EDDC scrutiny meeting this Thursday 3 November 6.00 pm

“Police and Crime Commissioner (pages 12 – 13)
The PCC, Alison Hernandez, will give a brief outline of her work since her election and respond to the questions submitted in advance (contained in the agenda papers) as well as answer questions put at the meeting.”

Click to access 031116-scrutiny-agenda-combined.pdf

Make millions, pay peanuts … EDDC says that’s fine

“Town councillors have reiterated their opposition to Churchill Retirement Living’s plans to demolish Green Close, in Drakes Avenue, and build 36 sheltered housing apartments for the elderly.

They said the housing stock for older people cannot keep growing without also creating homes for nurses and carers to look after them – and argued the developer could cut into its 30 per cent operating profit margin to pay for it.

Planning committee members suggested Churchill should pay at least £360,000.

Councillor Ian Barlow, committee chairman, told the Herald: “Churchill’s profit margin is the one of the highest in the industry.

“They say they can’t pay more than £41,000 or it won’t be profitable – but those 36 homes are probably going to be worth £6-7million.

“Churchill is making a profit and taking it out of the town. They’re bringing in older people who will use the facilities, but they’re barely putting anything into the pot.”

The £41,000 referred to is a ‘section 106’ payment – cash that is meant to mitigate the impact of developments and fund improvements such as ‘affordable’ housing. The contribution depends on factors such as the size and number of dwellings being built.

Churchill is proposing to build 36 apartments in place of the 23-bed Green Close care home, which was run by Devon County Council until cutbacks brought about its closure in 2014.

The planning committee, which met last week, ruled: “Members noted that a contribution of £41,208 had been offered by the applicant towards affordable housing. Members expressed the view that this was an insult to the community of Sidmouth and urged the local planning authority not to accept the offer.”

Cllr Barlow compared the Green Close proposal with the Sanditon development, on the plot of the former Fortfield Hotel.

The developer there built 29 apartments and made a £1.5million ‘section 106’ payment – 36 times what Churchill is offering.

Cllr Barlow said the firm can avoid a larger payment because it is creating sheltered housing, adding: “We’re concerned that a lot of places are being provided for the elderly, but there’s nowhere being built for younger people.

“If there’s no provision at the same time for a nurse or a carer to live, who is going to look after them?”

Churchill’s planning director, Andrew Burgess, told the Herald: “We are disappointed by Sidmouth Town Council’s decision, since we have been consulting the community and working with the planning authorities for several months to develop plans for an attractive and sustainable new retirement community that will bring benefits to local people and the local economy.”

He said the proposed affordable housing contribution is based on a detailed viability assessment, industry best practice and factors such as the market value of the site.

Mr Burgess added: “We will continue to work with the council and the local community to ensure we can deliver the high-quality specialist retirement accommodation that is urgently needed by older people in Sidmouth.”

The application has been recommended for approval by EDDC’s planning officers, who noted the ‘comparatively modest’ financial contribution.

The authority’s development management committee will decide its fate on Tuesday (November 1).”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/home/developer_s_offer_slammed_as_insult_to_sidmouth_1_4756271

EDDC: Can’t tell us what they did – because someone else did it for them and they have no paperwork!

THIS IS HOW EDDC DEALS WITH MANY OF OUR FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUESTS – A MASTERPIECE OF LAME EXCUSES, AVOIDANCE AND POSSIBLY WORSE.

The implication in the correspondence below raises serious questions.

1. EDDC does not appear to check what a third-party has done on its behalf.
2. It does not seem to ask for proof that the third party has done the work.
3. It seems to allow work that needs legal clearance to go ahead on the basis of 1 and 2 above with seemingly no proof that it IS legal.

FIRST YOU MAKE A CLEAR REQUEST:

Dear East Devon District Council,

“Following Cllr Moulding’s statement of today’s date (28.09.16) on BBC Radio Devon, that EDDC had ‘used a badger expert, and applied for the relevant license from Natural England’, in respect of the badgers identified as living on the site of the Jungle Fun and Crazy Golf, on The Queen’s Drive, Exmouth, I would like to request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and Environmental Information Regulations 2004, the following additional information:

1. When were badgers first identified as living on the Jungle Fun and crazy golf site?
2. On what date was the ‘badger expert’, Dr. Brown, enlisted by EDDC in respect of the badgers on the Jungle fun and crazy golf site, and what was his brief?
3 – Please provide Dr. Brown’s report pertaining to the badgers on the Jungle Fun and crazy golf site in full.
4. On what date was a license to interfere with a sett applied for with Natural England?
5. Please provide full details of the application made (the original application form and all attached material, and any relevant communications).
6. On what date, if at all, was this license granted?
7. Following the Radio Devon report in which it was stated permission had been given to move the badgers to a new site, please confirm that date on which that has, or will, happen, and any related documentation.

Yours faithfully,”

THEN EDDC GIVES YOU A REPLY ON SOME POINTS – WITH CRUCIAL INFORMATION MISSING ON THE REST – THIS TIME SAYING IT IS BECAUSE ANOTHER ORGANISATION MADE THE APPLICATION ON THEIR BEHALF AND THEY HAVEN’T SEEN WHAT THAT ORGANISATION ASKED FOR OR THE LICENCE THAT ORGANISATION SAYS IT GOT FOR THEM:

[Points 1-3 are answered]

… In respect of parts (4-7) of your request, the application was made on behalf of the council and we do not hold a copy of the application or
licence itself
.”

SO YOU ASK AGAIN – ANOTHER DELAY FOR UP TO 20 DAYS TILL THEY REPLY

“I would like to further request under the FOI act 200 and Environmental Regulations Act 2004:

1 – Who made the application of behalf of the Council.
2 – On what date did they make this application.
3 – As the requested application was made on behalf of the Council I would like to re-request a copy of the original application, as I believe this is ‘information held by another person on behalf of the authority’, which as stated in the ICO report (https://ico.org.uk/media/1148/informatio… ) , is held for the purposes of the FOI act.”

A smell of badger poo somewhere?

Public toilets next for the chop in East Devon asks EDA councillor?

“Fears have been voiced for Sidmouth’s free public toilets as district bosses review their £800,000 cost in a bid to balance the books.

East Devon District Council (EDDC) is taking stock of its conveniences and is looking into paid access at some ‘key’ sites, leasing some to businesses and ‘innovative’ ways of reducing the cost of providing its StreetScene service.

Also on the cards is ‘rationalising’ its provision, but the authority insists that no decision has yet been made and residents will be consulted. Any changes are at least two years away, says the council.

Councillor Cathy Gardner, ward member for Sidmouth Town, said the result will be taxpayers paying more for less – and warned the authority will soon run out of ways to cut costs.

“A town like Sidmouth needs free public toilets,” she said. “An elderly population and lots of visitors with children need them, otherwise we have an increase in urination in public places.

“As well as cutting services that we’ve had as a mark of civilisation since the Victorian era, we will be paying more in council tax and getting less.

“This is what austerity means at a local level. It really does affect everyone and I doubt whether things will ever be put back.

“Once an asset is sold, it’s gone – never to be returned – and how do you balance the books next time?”

An EDDC spokeswoman said: “The council recognises that public toilet provision is a very important service for our residents and visitors – however, it is not a statutory service and we provide it because we know how much it is valued.

“As part of the council plan, we need to look at ways of operating services differently in order to help meet our budget deficit of £2.6million.

“We spend around £800,000 per annum on our toilets, so we need to assess them responsibly for quality, level of provision in any given area and possible options for different ways of operating.

“However, we would like to stress that no decisions have yet been made – it is far too early and is still a work in progress.”

The spokeswoman said the provision is being reviewed and the options will be discussed by EDDC’s asset management forum and cabinet. She added: “As and when proposals come forward, there will be full engagement, including consultation, with all interested parties.

“We anticipate that any changes would not come into place for at least two years.”

http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/cathy-gardner/20161027/sidmouth-herald-concern-public-toilets-across-east-devon/

EDDC’s knuckles thrashed three times by Information Commissioner

From Save our Sidmouth website today. Coruscating condemnation of their secrecy over Knowle relocation.

“Knowle relocation project: BREAKING NEW

Information Commissioner tells East Devon District Council to publish documentation

News just in that the ICO have released three Decision Notices. They will be available on their website shortly:

https://search.ico.org.uk/ico/search/decisionnotice

Meanwhile, here is an overview:

Case: FER0626901
Pegasus agreement re Knowle

The ICO are telling EDDC to come up with all of this:

“I would like the Council to disclose the details of the agreement it has entered into with Pegasus for the Knowle site.
I would like to see the full, unredacted version of the agreement.
I understand that the information at issue would not be exploited by a competitor and that disclosure would not place either party at a commercial disadvantage.
All parties, including Pegasus, will have known that they would be subject to the FOIA when the agreement was signed.
To reiterate, I would like the full publication of the commercial terms of the agreement.
I would like you to provide me with all of the documentation I have requested: in their original electronic versions and not in their scanned versions.”

From: Pegasus agreement re Knowle – a Freedom of Information request to East Devon District Council – WhatDoTheyKnow

Case: FER0608237
Projected maintenance costs for relocation project

The ICO say EDDC don’t have to produce spreadsheets but have to publish the following re the new-build at Honiton:

“To disclose the price that the developer is prepared to pay for the land from the cash flow documents which the council withheld.”

The ‘Conclusions’ are interesting, however:

“53. There is a public interest in protecting the public purse, in this case this is balanced in this case against the public interest in allowing the public to scrutinise the council’s decisions and financial assumptions about the project to develop new offices for itself. This latter aspect clearly raises the level of transparency which would be expected as the council could be seen to be spending public money on its own facilities, for its own purposes. It has argued that it needs to change offices as overall, doing so would save the public money compared to staying in its current offices. The public however cannot know whether this is true without further information being open for them to scrutinise.”

With ref to:
Projected maintenance costs for relocation project – a Freedom of Information request to East Devon District Council – WhatDoTheyKnow

Case: FER0623403
Decision process which led to the award of the conditional contract with Pegasus re Knowle

The ICO are telling EDDC to come up with the last from this list – EDDC having given the first 5, but not the 6th:

“I request information on the decision to award a contract to PegasusLife for the development of the Knowle site in Sidmouth, including, but not limited to:
1. Bid documentation provided to prospective bidders;
2. process for and criteria for selection of successful bidder;
3. Number of organisations who expressed an interest in bidding;
4. Number of organisations who submitted a bid;
5. Names of organisations who submitted a bid;
6. Minutes of meetings and correspondence on the subject.”

From:
Decision process which led to the award of the conditional contract with Pegasus re Knowle – a Freedom of Information request to East Devon District Council – WhatDoTheyKnow

Sidmouth seafront: how to say nothing much in several hundred words

” Seafront project is a ‘golden opportunity’ for Sidmouth
“Landowners Sidmouth Town Council (STC) and East Devon District Council (EDDC) are together conducting a scoping study and will be commissioning experts to appraise the area.

The authorities have pulled together valley organisations and Devon County Council to form a reference group that will ‘act as a bridge’ between the expert consultants, the stakeholders and the wider public.

The Sid Valley Neighbourhood Plan Group, the Sid Vale Association, Vision Group for Sidmouth and Sidmouth Chamber of Commerce are all represented.

Councillor Jeff Turner, who chairs the reference group and the town council, said: “We have a good representation of the major bodies from the town on this group who have shown historic leadership and a keen interest in the future of Port Royal.

“With the help of our experts, the study will provide us with information on the constraints and opportunities for the area with options and how viable they are.

“This will help us move forward toward a detailed vision for the area.

“Sidmouth is one of the best coastal towns in England and, with land being in public ownership, this is a golden opportunity to look at ways of renewing the eastern gateway to the town, ensuring that it is both enhanced and protected.”

Cllr Turner stressed that no decisions have been made about the future of the area.

“The scoping study is the start of a process that will involve detailed visioning for the area that will inform decisions in the future,” he said.

“The study is likely to take three to four months to complete and during this time consultants will carry out consultation both with tenants and members of various clubs as well as our residents and businesses.

“Wherever possible, we will work together with Sidmouth’s organisations to ensure that consultation is carried out in a coordinated way.”

The reference group decided it will involve existing work already carried out on Port Royal, and send out communication to tenants to update them after every meeting.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/seafront_project_is_a_golden_opportunity_for_sidmouth_1_4750184

Where do we get the important local news? Not in the Midweek Herald!

This week’s Archant (Honiton) Midweek Herald.

Bearing in mind the quote yesterday that “Journalism ask the questions people don’t want to answer, otherwise it is PR”, this week’s Midweek Herald is pure PR.

One short letter about losing community hospitals, a front page lead story on rent hikes for Honiton Rugby Club, with no coverage of the rent hikes at ALL sports facilities on EDDC land throughout the district, then mostly lots of pre-packaged press releases from local sources. Of course, with the weekly mention of the Thelma Hulbert Gallery.

NOTHING on the district’s fight to keep hospital beds open.
NOTHING on Hugo Swire’s parliamentary debate about local health services last week.
NOTHING about their MP Neil Parish’s view on the situation.

Journalism? Awkward questions? Not on your life. No boat-rocking, move along here, nothing to see, that’s just a tiny iceberg in front of us, nothing worry about … oh, look, kittens!

Exmouth Splat – how do we get from here to there?

Freedom of Information request and (non) answer


[Exmouth] Watersports centre
Date submitted: 18 October 2016
Summary of request

“Please can you tell me, how will the proposed watersports centre on Exmouth seafront gain access to the sea?

Will there be a water channel bulldozed across the beach from where the existing road is right up to the waters edge?

Will the proposal effectively slice the beach into two sections separated by water?

What engineering assessment has been prepared of the effects of any such channel or watery access on the currents, wave action and ensuing changes to sediment/sand erosions and depositions?

Summary of response

No formal planning application has been received for the development you refer to and no information is currently held which provides answers to the questions you have raised.”

Date responded: 19 October 2016

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/access-to-information/freedom-of-information/freedom-of-information-published-requests/

Scrutiny Committee scrutinises Police and Crime Commissioner – sort of, maybe

“Police and Crime Commissioner (pages 12 – 13)
The PCC, Alison Hernandez, will give a brief outline of her work since her election and respond to the questions submitted in advance (contained in the agenda papers) as well as answer questions put at the meeting.

[Owl is not quite sure why most questions seem to be about Exmouth]

… Questions put in advance to Police and Crime Commissioner for response on 3 November 2016

Bill Nash
EDDC Councillor for Exmouth Town Ward

Q1 What more can be done to overcome the extreme disturbance from Boy/Girl Racers in both cars & motor bikes?

The local Exmouth police monitored one of the five roads for speed where residents were being disturbed and woken at night. They concluded “that the results recommend no further action by enforcement or regulatory bodies “. Excessive noise is being caused by anti-social driving. What can be done?

Q2 Why is there not visible policing in Exmouth particularly at night? During the day there are very few PCSO’s visible.

Q3 Is Exmouth police station due to be closed completely as proposed in 2015? For a town of 38,000 rising to 50,000 in summer months a police presence should be available with public access – not just ” phone 101 “.

Alan Dent
Vice Chairman of Scrutiny Committee

Q4 What guarantee is there for our PCSOs to continue in employment?

Q5 What improvements have been made to the 101 service?

Richard Scott
Exmouth Town Councillor

Q6 I would like to know if Alison Hernandez is aware of the roadshow we held at Exmouth and if so could she explain what her office intends to do about one of the largest complaints, notably girl and boy racers on the seafront and the main thoroughfares from the sea front such as Carlton Hill, where speeds of double the speed limit are commonplace through residential streets?

Q7 Also could she explain why her office needs a head count of 20.3 and expenditure of 1.4 million, could this money and heads be better spent and used out on the streets of Devon and Cornwall?

Councillor Bruce de Saram Councillor for Exmouth Town Ward

Q8 Does the Police Commissioner agreed that one of the Licensing objectives is the Prevention of crime and disorder in which the Police are regarded as being the Lead Agency in implementing this strategy? Can you please confirm that Exmouth will definitely receive adequate support from the PCSO’s on the beat to achieve this objective so that the Police logs will clearly show when they are called out to deal with a licensing issue. This is because there has been confusion around this issue due to a lack of Police resources to attend and log the problem.”

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/media/1901200/031116-scrutiny-agenda-combined.pdf

EDDC spends more than £ 700,000 on external legal advice in 3 years

Summary of request

I would like to know the amount of money the department spent on the services of external law firms and barristers for each of the last three years (years ending March 31). If this is not possible within the restrictions of the Freedom of Information Act, two years of data will suffice.

Summary of response

2013/14 Legal fees including barristers £285,075.61
2014/15 Legal fees including barristers £353,060.78
2015/16 Legal fees including barristers £79,053.34

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/access-to-information/freedom-of-information/freedom-of-information-published-requests/