Agenda and draft minutes

To approve and sign the minutes of the Special meeting held on 25 November 2025 and the ordinary meeting held on 9 December 2025.

The minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting of the Council held on 25 November 2025 were moved by the Lord Mayor, and taken as read, approved and signed as correct.

The minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Council held on 9 December 2025 were moved by the Lord Mayor, taken as read, approved and signed as correct, subject to the amendments tabled.

Councillors are reminded of the need to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests that relate to business on the agenda and which have not already been included in the register of interests, before any discussion takes place on the item. Unless the interest is sensitive, you must also disclose the nature of the interest. In accordance with the Council's Code of Conduct, you must then leave the room and must not participate in any further discussion of the item. Councillors requiring clarification should seek the advice of the Monitoring Officer prior to the day of the meeting.

No declarations of interest were made by Members.

To receive official communications of the Lord Mayor.

The Lord Mayor advised Members of the events that she and the Deputy Lord Mayor had attended. These included:  

• the University of Exeter’s winter graduation;  

• a number of carol services including the Wonford Community Centre, the Blue Light Services, Exeter Philharmonic Choir, and the Cathedral;  

• a service for the victims of the Hong Kong fire at the Sacred Heart Church;  

• the epiphany service and mass at St Marys Steps;  

• a number of pantomimes including Jack and the Beanstalk at Exeter Northcott Theatre, Cinderella by ELTC, Peter Pan, and the Pinhoe Pantomime Societies production of Beauty and the Beast;  

• the Exeter Society for the Blind’s Annual Christmas event;  

• the Nigerian Community’s Christmas party;  

• a reception at the Bishop’s Palace; and  

• the Exeter Classic Motorcycle Club’s Christmas display.  

The Lord Mayor advised Members that she had been given a cheque for £600 by the Exeter Classic Motorcycle Club for her charity Riding for the Disabled. She had also been given a cheque for £439.56 for Riding for the Disabled following the Christmas Fayre at Exeter City Council.  

The Lord Mayor advised Members that a petition had been received in September, regarding the extension of Article 4 in Hillcrest Park and Doriam Close, which would be an item at the Strategic Scrutiny Committee on 15 January.  

To receive questions relating to items on the agenda from members of the public and responses.

Details of questions should be notified to Democratic Services by 10am at least three working days prior to the meeting which for this meeting will be Thursday 8 January 2026.

Further information about speaking at a committee can be found here: Public Speaking at Meetings.

The Lord Mayor advised that two questions from Members of the public had been received.  

Question from Mr Timothy Coyle:  

The Minister’s letter invites councils to consider postponing the May 2026 local elections in order to “release capacity” for local government reorganisation.  

Does the Leader of the Council accept that postponing a scheduled election would establish precedent whereby democratic terms of office may be extended for administrative or organisation reasons?  

The Leader, Councillor Bialyk, responded to the question advising Mr Coyle that he did not accept that any such decision would establish a precedent and the Government has through the appropriate Secretary of State who holds these powers and has exercised them in similar situations involving LGR in the past. 

In a supplementary question Mr Coyle asked the Leader if he could explain how the citizens of Exeter could take democracy seriously when elections had been cancelled in a short period of time?  

The Leader advised Mr Coyle that the powers lay with the Secretary of State. It was not unusual, and they would hear more about this in the discussion later.  

Question from Ms Lucy Findlay MBE:  

Section 4.4 sets out the activities that are required to move forward with the new unitary structure. What are the key immediate priorities in this list which will be enabled by the redeployment of the 2026 election resources?  

The Leader responded to the question stating that the Chief Executive would deal with this in detail later and it would be best for the Chief Executive to explain in her report.  

The minutes of the Strategic Scrutiny Committee on 20 November 2025 were presented by the Chair, Councillor Pole, and taken as read.  

Councillor Pole advised that she had notified Democratic Services of amendments for accuracy and they had been accepted.  

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Strategic Scrutiny Committee held on 20 November 2025 would be received.  

The minutes of the Planning Committee of 1 December 2025 were presented by the Chair, Councillor Knott, and taken as read.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 1 December 2025 be received.

The minutes of the Planning Committee of 8 December 2025 were presented by the Chair, Councillor Knott, and taken as read.

Councillor Knott thanked Members for their work, and it was clear that they had taken time to read the papers in great detail.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 8 December 2025 be received.

The minutes of the Exeter Harbour Board of 11 December 2025 were presented by the Chair, Councillor Ruth Williams, and taken as read.  

Councillor Read asked if an update could be provided about the status of the public consultation regarding Trews Weir, and if the public event with the contractors had taken place.  

Councillor Ruth Williams advised that there had been a delay to the programme, and the consultation had been deferred. She informed Members that she would provide an update at the March meeting of the Harbour Board.  

Councillor Atkinson asked if Councillor Ruth Williams was able to provide feedback on how the money diverted from Mallinson Bridge by Devon County Council would be spent. 

Councillor Ruth Williams advised Councillor Atkinson that she had written to the Devon County Council Cabinet Member for Climate Change and Bio-diversity but had not received a response as yet and she had also requested a meeting between the Devon County Council Planning Officer, the Health and Wellbeing Team, and the Exeter Port Authority.  

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Exeter Harbour Board held on 11 December 2025 be received.  

The minutes of the Executive Committee of 16 November 2025 were presented by the Leader, Councillor Bialyk, and taken as read.  

In respect of Minute No.92 - 2026/27 Budget Strategy and Medium Term Financial Plan, the Leader moved the recommendations, seconded by Councillor Wright. Following a vote the recommendations were CARRIED.  

Councillor Moore asked the Leader if he was confident in the budget proposals, and to what extent the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) was still relevant given the Fair Funding Review 2.0 outcomes?  

The Leader advised Councillor Moore that he was confident that this would be right, and that there would be a more in-depth discussion on the matter at the Executive and the Council’s meeting to set the budget for 2026/27.  

In respect of Minute No.94 – Housing Rents and Services Charges 2026-27, Councillor Moore asked the Leader about convergence rents and was concerned that it may not be clear to tenants how much their rent would increase. The Leader advised that he would obtain details from the Strategic Director for Corporate Resources but would be disappointed if this matter had not been discussed at the Council Housing and Development Advisory Board.  

In respect of Minute No.95 - RAMM Collections Development Policy (2026-30) the Leader moved, and Councillor Wright seconded the recommendations and following a unanimous vote were CARRIED.  

Councillor Darling spoke in support of the policy, commending staff and stating that she had no doubt the policy was of the highest standard.  

Councillor Foale, Portfolio Holder for Arts, Culture & Tourism felt that the Royal Albert Memorial Museum (RAMM) had an amazing collection and informed Members that it only displayed 1% of the artifacts which it held.  

In respect of Minute No.96 – RAMM Forward Plan (2026-30) the Leader moved, and Councillor Wright seconded the recommendations and following a vote were CARRIED.  

Councillor Banyard asked the Leader if following the break-in last year there would be a review of the insurance policy. Councillor Foale, as Portfolio Holder for Arts, Culture & Tourism advised that the RAMM used the same risk register as that used across Exeter City Council.  

In respect of Minute No.97 – Exeter City Council Housing Services Hate Crime Policy the Leader moved, and Councillor Wright seconded the recommendations, and following a unanimous vote were CARRIED.  

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Executive Committee held on 16 December 2025 be received.  

To receive the report of the Chief Executive.

The Leader moved the recommendations of the report, seconded by Councillor Wright, and invited the Chief Executive to present the report.  

The Chief Executive highlighted the following points in presenting the report: 

The Minister of State for Local Government and Homelessness had invited Council Leaders in areas undergoing Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) to set out their views on whether postponing the May 2026 local elections would better support the delivery of LGR. The deadline for the Leader to respond was midnight on Thursday, 15 January. The letter from the Minister of State could be found in Appendix A.  

The purpose of the report was to enable an informed discussion on whether postponing the elections would release capacity to deliver LGR effectively.  

The report recommended firstly, that Council notes the letter from the Minister of State and considers its implications and secondly, having heard Members’ views, the Leader was asked to respond by 15 January, on whether or not to request the postponement of the May 2026 elections. 

The Chief Executive clarified that there was no decision being made locally on elections as that was not within the powers of this Council. Only government could make that decision, should they be minded to do so under Section 87 of the Local Government Act 2000, which gave the Secretary of State the authority to change the electoral cycle through secondary legislation. There was precedent on postponing elections during LGR which had taken place previously. 

There were three reasons identified in the report for considering postponing the elections scheduled for 7 May:  

1. councillors elected would serve only two years before their roles were abolished under the new unitary structure as opposed to the usual term of four years;  

2. the Government’s statutory consultation on LGR at the start of February may coincide with the pre-election period, limiting meaningful engagement with residents. If the start of the consultation was delayed, which had happened with other timescales on LGR, the Government’s seven-week consultation period could coincide with the pre-election period.  

3. Postponement would release approximately £265,000 of resources, both financial and staffing, to focus on critical transition work including governance, service design budgets, workforce changes, and technology. There may also need to be work done, dependent on the Government’s decision on the structure of local government in Devon, to prepare for Shadow Elections in 2027. This needed to be balanced against the risks of postponing elections:  

·        Residents may feel disenfranchised if elections were postponed. 

·        Some councillors may choose to resign rather than extend their term. This would require by-elections to be held which would lead to some costs and workload.  

Members were assured that work had already started on preparing for local elections and this would continue until the Government confirmed their position.  

Venues had been booked and recruitment to the 450 roles required to deliver the election would start in the next few weeks. The cost to deliver local elections was around £265,000 excluding any payments already made.  

In terms of work required to deliver LGR,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 128.

To consider the report of the Independent Remuneration Panel.

The Leader moved the recommendations, seconded by Councillor Wright, and invited the Strategic Director for Corporate Resources to introduce the report.  

The Strategic Director highlighted the key points of the report making reference to:  

• an increase in allowances of 3.2% based on the officers pay award, which followed the usual convention; and  

• the Independent Remuneration Panel had introduced two new Special Responsibility Allowances, for the Deputy Leader of the Council and the Deputy Chair of the Audit and Governance Committee.   

Councillor Read asked if food and drink allowances would be introduced. 

The Strategic Director for Corporate Resources advised that food and drink was being looked into.  

During debate Councillor Palmer informed Members that she felt uncomfortable discussing allowances following the previous item.  

In summing up the Leader advised Members that the rates were set by the Independent Remuneration Panel and followed the staff pay award. He advised that there had been a survey sent out and that Members had had the opportunity to make their thoughts on allowances known.  

Following a vote the recommendations were CARRIED.  

To receive the report of the Strategic Director for Corporate Resources.

The Leader moved the recommendations, seconded by Councillor Wright, and invited the Strategic Director for Corporate Resources to introduce the report.  

The Strategic Director for Corporate Resources introduced the report making the following points:  

• this was the business plan for Exeter City Living (ECL) for 2026/27;  

• the company that managed the property did so passively and the Council undertook all the management decisions; and 

• this would be the first year that it was entirely reliant on rental income, meaning there was a big reduction in the amount of rent coming into Exeter City Council as costs of ECL were previously covered by development income. 

The Strategic Director for Corporate Resources answered Members’ questions in the following terms:  

• the management fee increase came after it was decided by Members to scale back ECL;  

• the cost of the audit outweighs the amount of money going through the company;  

• the management company holds the flats on behalf of the City Council but did not do anything else;  

• he was happy to get officers to provide an answer on value for money of having a management agent; 

• there were currently two void properties which would be filled in due course; and 

• in total the flats generated around £70,000.  

In summing up the Leader stated that six properties was not a large amount and it was only a small amount of money.  

Following a unanimous vote the recommendations were CARRIED. 

To consider the report of the Strategic Director for Place.

The Leader moved the recommendations, seconded by Councillor Wright, and invited the Strategic Director for Place to introduce the report.  

The Strategic Director for Place made the following points:  

• this aligned with the Councils Corporate Plan; and  

• it was built from the Community Safety Team (CST) pilot that had been judged as a success.  

The Strategic Director for Place responded to Members’ questions in the following terms:  

• a five-year period was proposed in the hope that a future council would continue the commitment;  

• the chart in the report was a guide and would be reevaluated each year; and  

• the proposal was to broaden the remit beyond the city centre eventually and the team had a vehicle, so were able to do respond in good time.  

Councillor Moore, as Leader of the Green Group, made the following points:  

• thanked the Portfolio Holder for working with Councillors over a number of years;  

• she had seen the impact of the CST and appreciated their efforts;  

• there was a need for better advocation and joining up services for people who were street attached; and  

• there was a gap in the budget, how would this be funded?  

Councillor Wright as Portfolio Holder for Corporate Services, Community Safety and City Centre made the following points:  

• this was important to her and to everyone else;  

• the CST would have responsibility for dog fouling in public areas;  

• she was regularly updated on the progress and impacts that the team were having, and data proved that anti-social behaviour (ASB) levels were decreasing;  

• ASB issues within the city were complex; and 

• the Community Safety Partnership (CSP) with Devon and Cornwall Police, InExeter and other organisations were instrumental in getting the CST set up.  

During debate Members made the following points:  

• this report was welcomed and provided a good tool kit to address issues that came up frequently with the public;  

• Joined up services would be improved by a unitary council;  

• this was really positive, especially that it had come from points established in the Residents’ Survey; and  

• empathy was key.  

Following a unanimous vote the recommendations were CARRIED.   

To receive questions from Members on any matter for which the Council has powers, duties or affects the City.

In accordance with Standing Order No.8, the following question was put by Councillor Read to the Leader:  

“As ECC has been unable to repair the bollard at the entry point to Cathedral Green what approaches are the Council exploring, such as number plate recognition software and cameras or other options – to protect this public space and keep pedestrians safe, especially at evenings and weekends?”  

The Leader responded stating:  

“To date, a suitable design has not been identified to allow the bollard to be reinstated. This is due to the archaeology below the yard and the fact that the road construction is very shallow, and it has meant that the electrics and hydraulics for the bollard are easily damaged. However, Council Surveyors are currently assessing alternative options which will be taken forward if financially viable.” 

In a supplementary question, Councillor Read advised that she was hoping to hear the alternative solutions that would be proposed.  

In accordance with Standing Order No.8, the following question was put by Councillor Banyard to the Leader:  

“Could the Portfolio Holder explain why Heras fencing and ‘Danger: Keep Out’ signs have recently been erected around St Catherine’s Almshouses in Princesshay, what risks or issues have been identified, who is responsible for the site, and what is expected timescale is for resolving the situation?”  

The Leader responded stating:  

“St Catherine’s Almshouses forms part of the Princesshay leased demise. The head lease includes a management agreement for the Almshouses under which the Council is responsible for the repair and regularly survey the property. The site was Heras fenced due to concerns about the stability of the chimneys. The Council is currently working to identify the risks.” 

In accordance with Standing Order No.8, the following question was put by Councillor Moore to the Leader: 

“Now the Brown Field Release grant funding has been returned to Government, what options or plans are the Council considering for the future of the Council’s Belle Isle site once the depot moves to an alternative location?” 

The Leader responded stating:  

“The site would need to be subject to a feasibility assessment to evaluate site constraints and opportunities. This process would also require commercial and planning input together with any wider consultation deemed necessary. The outcome would enable Officers to report on available land use options and associated delivery arrangements.”

In a supplementary question, Councillor Moore asked the Leader:  

“Given that the Environment Agency said the site was not suitable for development due to flood risk what sort of feasibility do you think they would be able to undertake?” 

The Leader advised that he would ask one of the Directors to respond to this question outside of the meeting.