Nature reserve will get £1.1m backing

Plans to back an East Devon nature reserve with a £1.1 million cash injection have been backed again after an initial decision was revisited.

Backing had already been given to plough £1 million into an investment fund to help provide an annual income to cover the costs of maintaining Clyst Meadows Countryside Park.
A further £100,000 had also been agreed, money that was destined for a high interest account that could boost cash levels when returns from the investment fund were less than required in any given year.
The cash would come from developer contributions and, some argued, provide a more certain funding stream over the 80-year period that the council is legally obliged to oversee it for.
But East Devon District Council’s scrutiny committee called the decision in, meaning it had another opportunity to decide whether this funding approach was the best option.
The council does have to create a plan to fund the ongoing maintenance and future improvements of the countryside park, itself part of the wider Clyst Valley Regional Park in Broadclyst , but some had questioned whether the investment fund method was appropriate.
Councillor Mike Goodman (Conservative, Sidmouth Sidford), the chair of the scrutiny committee, said there had been “some uncertainty on the right course”.
“Originally the cabinet agreed £2 million in funding, but when one of our funding boards rejected that, they relooked at ways to finance the green space and decided they could do it for £1.1 million,” he said.
“Why did they not do that in the first place?”
He added that at the most recent cabinet meeting on the issue in December, where the £1.1 million was approved, two members voted for, two against, and four abstained.
“That shows it isn’t an exact science,” Cllr Goodman added.
Councillor Geoff Jung (Liberal Democrat, Woodbury and Lympstone) said the council had to find a way to fund the servicing of the site.
“This is the surest way of guaranteeing the area is well managed,” he said.
Cllr Jung added that securing an agreement to help maintain the area was also vital for the district’s housebuilding ambitions. That’s because councils have to find ways to bolster the flora and fauna lost when development happens on greenfield sites.
“Teignbridge has a similar [investment] model but is more expensive,” Cllr Jung added. “We looked at Teignbridge and that’s where we got the funding costs from, but when we reassessed it we realised we could make savings.”
Councillor Todd Olive (Liberal Democrat, Rockbeare & Wimple) stated he was in the “unusual position” of disagreeing with both council officers and cabinet colleagues.
“I’m the infrastructure portfolio holder, and I think we could spend that £1.1 million on more important items of infrastructure in the district without compromising our legal duty to provide this green space,” he said.
“The alternative is an annual drawdown from the community infrastructure levy (CIL) pot, so it is still developers’ money and not council money, and that is a better way of doing it. It’s the way we pay for a lot of things.”
Councils receive so-called CIL money from housing developers, and keep this ring-fenced to fund projects that benefit local communities.
East Devon pledged around £10 million to seven projects across the district last year.
Cllr Olive added that the council had a roughly £70 million gap in terms of the amount of money it needs for infrastructure projects it deems ‘priority one’.
Councillor Christopher Burhop (Independent, Newton Poppleford and Harpford) expressed reservations about why this project had been chosen for such a long-term investment, or endowment.
“I’m struggling,” he said, “as it may be the way it has been done in the past to set up an endowment-type fund for meeting very long term commitments, but this council has an enormous number of very long term commitments, like the housing fund.
“There are an enormous amount of long-term commitments just in housing, let alone others we have such as the environment and leisure, so you could argue we could have an endowment for any of them, so I’m struggling to see what this project has been chosen for this type of funding.”
Cllr Burhop added he also viewed the 6.75 per cent management fee of the investment fund the council was proposing to use – CCLA Local Property fund – as “really prohibitive”.
But other members felt that it made sense to back the original decision to use £1.1 million to support the green space.
“I’m the ward member for the area so I know what the money could be spent on,” said Councillor Paula Fernley (Green Party, Broadclyst).
“I know what has a shortfall and so it is incredibly difficult to balance these arguments, and it would be great to say not to spend it on the green space so the school might get a bit more CIL money, but my gut says we should go with officers’ recommendation then the deal is done, we’ve made the decision and we don’t have to keep revisiting it.”
She added that putting in a long-term agreement now should protect the funding for the area even once local government reorganisation happens and new councils are created.
The scrutiny voted in favour of backing cabinet’s original decision, preferring that to the other options on the table of sending it back to cabinet or asking full council to consider it.