MID Devon District Council’s decision to sell the Crediton council offices to a private buyer appears to me to be based on blatant political malice.

More than that however, the decision appears to be in breach of its own constitution ( www.middevon.gov.uk/media/205661/mddc-constitution-april-2018-sg.pdf ).

It is clear from the minutes of the MDDC Cabinet meeting held on June 14 that the resolution to sell the Crediton council offices to “Buyer 2” was made purely on financial grounds, whereas its Constitution requires it also to take into account the effect the decision will have on Crediton residents.

The relevant paragraphs in the Constitution are:

Article 15.3(2) identifies a “key decision as: “To be significant in terms of its effect on communities living or working in an area comprised two or more wards or electoral divisions of the relevant authority.”

Article 15.10 identifies the two statutory tests that have to be met for a decision to be regarded as “key”:

15.10(1) Significant expenditure or savings

To result in a local authority incurring expenditure which is, or making savings which are, significant having regard to the local authority’s budget for the service or function to which the decision relates. (MDDC’s Financial Rules set the figure at £50,000).

15.10.(2) Significant effect on communities

“The following guidance should be taken into account:

(a) Decisions should be treated as key where they are likely to have a significant effect on communities on two or more wards. For example, a council should regard as key a decision to amend the system for collecting recyclable waste or providing a new leisure facility in a neighbourhood, notwithstanding the thresholds of financial significance.

b) In considering whether a decision is likely to be significant, the decision maker will need to consider the strategic nature of the decision and whether or not the outcome will have an impact, for better or worse, on the amenity of the community or quality of service provided by the authority to a significant number of people living or working in the locality affected.”

Test One is met because the increased capital received (although not stated because the Cabinet discussion took place in private) exceeds £50,000.

Test Two is met because clearly the sale of the council offices will have a worse impact for both Crediton council wards and the surrounding wards.

The decision is therefore a “key decision”.

In making its decision the MDDC Cabinet ignored Article 15.10 (2)(b) of its own Constitution because it has not taken into account the effect the decision will have on Crediton residents.

The Council has therefore left itself open to challenge by Judicial Review.

Keith Mortimer

Searle Street

Crediton