Report of the Director of Finance & Resourcing (Treasurer) and the Director of Governance & Digital Services (DSFRA/21/9) attached.
Minutes:
(An item taken in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 during which the press and public were excluded from the meeting).
The Authority considered a report of the Director of Finance & Resourcing (Treasurer) and the Director of Governance & Digital Services (DSFRA/21/9) on the proposed disposal of Topsham Fire Station in the context of the policy approved by the Authority, at its meeting on 23 October 2020, for the disposal of land (Minute DSFRA/51 refers).
At the same meeting, the Authority had asked officers to explore potential community uses for the site. The report now identified the outcome of this exploration. Five organisations had expressed interest in acquiring the site but none had identified a proposed primary use aligned to the Authority’s statutory functions. Each had, though, identified potential secondary uses which could do so.
The Authority was reminded that:
· the general expectation, as per Section 123 of the Local Government Act 1972, was that any land should be disposed of for the best consideration that could reasonably be obtained. This was the main principle of the Authority’s approved policy on the disposal of land;
· that, in order to exercise its discretionary power to sell land at an undervalue, it would need to establish a tangible benefit to the Authority which could be quantified, financially. Failure to do so would expose the Authority to a risk of judicial challenge.
The report indicated that the proposed secondary uses identified were already well provided for by the Devon & Somerset Fire & Rescue Service and that the approved Integrated Risk Management Plan did not identify any proposed community use to support those services which the Authority had a statutory duty to secure.
If the Authority was minded to progress disposal of the Topsham site at an undervalue, it would need to commission an external, independent assessment to quantify, financially, the benefit of the proposed secondary uses to the Authority. This would entail further delays and expense in disposal of the site with no guarantee that the assessment could identify a sufficient quantifiable benefit, in which case the Authority would be required to dispose of the site for the best consideration that might reasonably be obtained.
In debating this item, the view was expressed that there may be merit in exploring further whether some form of community use for the site, compatible with Authority functions, could be ascertained. The Chair MOVED, with Councillor Peart seconding:
“(a) that the report be noted;
(b) that officers undertake further work to assess in more detail what would be required to develop a framework for the effective evaluation of bids in compliance with the exercise of the discretionary power conferred under the “general disposal consent (England) 2003 disposal of land for less than the best consideration that can reasonably be obtained”; and
(c) that the matter be reported back to a future meeting of the Authority.”
The Motion was put to the vote and declared CARRIED whereupon it was
RESOLVED
(a). that the report be noted;
(b). that officers undertake further work to assess in more detail what would be required to develop a framework for the effective evaluation of bids in compliance with the exercise of the discretionary power conferred under the “general disposal consent (England) 2003 disposal of land for less than the best consideration that can reasonably be obtained”; and
(c). that the matter be reported back to a future meeting of the Authority.”
Supporting documents: