Agenda and draft minutes

To receive apologies for absence from the meeting

The Chair welcomed all to the meeting.   

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors: A and D Brenton, L Bright, T Elliott, S Newton and P Pennington.

Confirmation of the Minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on 23^rd June, Extraordinary 14^th July and 28^th July.

It was proposed by Councillor C Leather, seconded by Councillor J Whittaker and -

Resolved:   That the minutes of the meeting held on 23^rd June be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

(Vote: For – 24, Against – 0, Abstentions – 5)

It was proposed by Councillor R Lock, seconded by Councillor P Hackett and -

Resolved:   That the minutes of the meeting held on 14^th July be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

(Vote: For – 19, Against – 0, Abstentions – 10)

It was proposed by Councillor D Bushby, seconded by Councillor S Inch and -

Resolved:   That the minutes of the meeting held on 28^th July be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

(Vote: For – 27, Against – 0, Abstentions – 2)

15 minute period for public contributions. The deadline for registering to speak is by 2pm Thursday 18^th September 2025. To register please email dem.services@torridge.gov.uk

There was one public speaker.

Councillor John Hutchings, Mayor of Holsworthy, addressed the Council advocating for the Holsworthy Agri-Business Park development project, emphasising its potential for economic growth and job creation in the region. He urged members to support the investment.

Members with interests to declare should refer to the Agenda item and describe the nature of their interest when the item is being discussed.

Members were reminded that declarations of interest should be made as and when the specific agenda item to which they related was under discussion.

It was proposed by Councillor D Bushby, seconded by Councillor S Harding and –

Resolved:

That the agenda, as circulated, be agreed.

(Vote: For – unanimous)

No matters were brought forward by the Chair.

To receive the report of the Finance Manager (& S151 Officer).

The Finance Manager (S151 Officer) presented the report, the purpose of which was to report on the treasury management activity in the year and actual prudential indicators for 2024/25.

Following the presentation of the report, a discussion took place.

It was confirmed that the Public Loans Board debt would be cleared by March 2027.

In response to a question about the council's investments and their potential connection with companies supporting Israel, the Finance Manager (S151 Officer) confirmed that investments are currently within the Treasury Policy, involving UK banks, building societies, and other local councils.

Members noted the report.

To receive a verbal update from the Leader of the Council and Chief Executive.

A verbal update on Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) was presented by the Leader of the Council, Councillor James and the Chief Executive.

The Leader confirmed a limited update would be provided due to lack of progression. He confirmed that KPMG Consultants were still working on data provided to establish the possibility of delivering different models, however the strongest model was still the 1-5-4 option previously advised. It was also confirmed that Devon County Council are investigating a solidarity model.  

A discussion then commenced.

Concern was raised about the timing and availability of data that is crucial for decision-making and that TDC has submitted the necessary data however, other authorities seem hesitant to share theirs. This delay is affecting the ability to make informed decisions.

The Leader provided reassurance that all data had been submitted to the Plymouth data bank, who is managing it on behalf of the districts and Devon County Council. Most of the data comes from Devon County Council, and there has been a slight delay in its arrival however KPMG Consultants now have access to this data. The next step is for KPMG Consultants to analyse the data in relation to adult care, children's services, and other relevant areas. Once their analysis is complete, the findings will be brought back for review.

It was questioned if Central Government had been made aware of TDC members concerns regarding the timescale and the actual process of LGR. The Chair advised he was not aware of concern being raised with Central Government and if members were minded to raise concern the best route would be via a Notice of Motion.

In response to a suggestion that information be shared before the end of November by way of an Extra Full Council meeting, the Leader advised how this would be difficult with the tight timeframe. However members were reminded of the Members Briefing scheduled for 6^th November, where LGR will be on the agenda and that there will be an Extraordinary Full Council on the 24^th November.

Councillor T Tinsley highlighted the idea of Neighbourhood Committees being established to localise decision making following LGR and wondered if a workshop could be arranged to discuss this in more detail. The Leader responded and advised that no definite details on this had been confirmed however, once more information was made available it would be discussed with members. He continued to state that the government had not released any information on how LGR will look. His only recommendation was to raise the matter at the next District Leaders meeting in order to clarify the intended approach. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) had been directly questioned on the constitution and powers, however the government simply do not have this information.

To receive an update from the Leader of the Council and Chief Executive.

The Head of Communities & Place presented the report, the purpose of which was to seek authority to reallocate £2M of funding from the Bideford Business Park Project to the delivery of a further phase of the Hatchmoor Industrial Estate Project. And for members to determine the future scope of the project and decide whether to proceed with phase one only or phases 1 and 2 combined.

Four design slides were presented and explained to members.

A discussion then took place.

In response to a question as why the whole £2.6M from Bideford Business Park Project was not being reallocated to Hatchmoor Industrial Estate Project, the Head of Communities & Place confirmed the Place Board had recommended that £2 million of the £2.6 million be allocated to this project, leaving the remaining balance to potentially be allocated to any other projects that may require additional funding.

It was confirmed that if members were minded to approve phases 1 and 2 additional borrowing would be required.

Following a question as to whether Cleavewood was considered when deciding on reallocating the funds, the Head of Communities & Place advised Cleavewood was considered however, it was thought that as Bideford Business Park project was to deliver industrial units to reallocate the funds to a project with similar objectives.

The benefits of phase 1 and 2 were detailed by the Head of Communities & Place.

Councillor S Andrews questioned the amount of car parking on site, to which the Head of Communities & Place advised this would be determined through the planning process.

Councillor C Cottle-Hunkin expressed her gratitude to the Place Board for this opportunity.

Regret was expressed that the Bideford Business Park project had not been successful; however, it was emphasised that this was not due to any lack of effort on the part of TDC officers.

It was confirmed that, if approved, additional borrowing for this project would not impact borrowing for any future projects that may materialise for Bideford. Borrowing for future projects would be assessed on each individual project.

Councillor C Bright addressed members highlighting the need for employment land in Torrington and proposed that recommendations 5.1, 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5 be approved. Councillor R Lock seconded this proposal.

It was proposed by Councillor C Bright, seconded by Councillor R Lock and –

Resolved:

That recommendations 5.1, 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5 in the report be approved.

(Vote: For – unanimous)

To receive an update from the Leader of the Council and Chief Executive.

The Chair confirmed this would now be discussed in Part II under item 16.

One question was submitted under Procedural Rule A9.

In accordance with the Constitution a written answer to the question was circulated to members.

Councillor P Hames was invited to ask a supplementary question, and asked

'I note the boiler is not being replaced but as I understand it is way beyond the recommended life span shouldn't it be replaced soon despite the building being energy inefficient? Or is the plan to dispose of or demolish the building?’

Councillor P Hames was advised he would receive a written response to his supplementary question within 5 working days.

To receive petitions (if any)

There were no petitions.

There were no notices of motion.

The Chair to move:

“That the public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting because of the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972”

Items which may be taken in the absence of the public and press on the grounds that exempt information may be disclosed.

It was proposed and seconded and –

Resolved:

That the meeting enter the Part II session.

(Vote: For – unanimous)

To receive an update from the Leader of the Council and Chief Executive.

The Chief Executive commenced this item and reminded members that the information within this item is private and confidential. The Chief Executive presented the report, the purpose of which was to seek Full Council’s guidance on how the project should proceed.

A lengthy discussion and debate progressed where members aired their opinions, asked questions and sought advice from officers.

Throughout the debate members put forward different proposals.

It was proposed by Councillor L Piper, seconded by Councillor P Shepherd and –

Resolved:

That recommendation point 2 in the report, with amendments, be approved.

A recorded vote was taken.

(Vote: For – 26, Against – 1, Abstentions – 2)

It was proposed and seconded and –

Resolved:

That the meeting exit Part II and close.

(Vote: For – unanimous)