Agenda and draft minutes

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 13 January 2026.

The minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Council held on 13 January 2026 were moved by the Lord Mayor, taken as read, approved and signed as a correct record.

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.

The Lord Mayor advised Members of the events she had attended, which included:

·        attended the Exeter College Awards, celebrating the achievements of young people, and visited the Exeter College Technology Centre to see cutting-edge apprenticeship work;

·        joined the opening of Tops Nursery, meeting staff and pupils;

·        attended Clyst Vale Community College’s production of ‘Beauty and the Beast’ at the Barnfield Theatre;

·        attended the Exeter University Theatre Company’s production of ‘And ThenThere Were None’ at the Northcott Theatre;

·        supported the IJW Dance Show at the Cygnet Theatre and the Mayura Dance Awards at America Hall;

·        attended performances by the Band of the Royal Marines at the Northcott Theatre and the Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra at the University Great Hall;

·        celebrated the 75th Anniversary of Exeter Writers at the Custom House and attended the Exeter History Book Festival at the Mint;

·        spoke at the Southernhay and Topsham Rotary Club breakfast meeting;

·        attended the AGM of Exeter Twinning Circle and heard about plans in Rennes to mark the 70th anniversary of the twinning between the two cities;

·        met with crafters and members of the Hong Kong community at Spring Festivals hosted at the Phoenix and the University Forum, celebrating the Year of the Horse;

·        attended Evensong for the Northern European Cathedrals conference;

·        marked the appointment of Canon Chris Palmer as Dean of Winchester Cathedral, with thanks given on behalf of the city;

·        commemorated Holocaust Memorial Day at services held in the Cathedral and the Guildhall;

·        marked four years of war in Ukraine with a vigil and an evening of Commemoration & Culture at St Stephen’s Church; and

·        attended the wreath-laying ceremony and service at the Cathedral to commemorate HMS Exeter.

The Lord Mayor invited the Leader to speak to make a special announcement.

The Leader expressed appreciation for the Chief Executive’s 20 years of dedicated service to the Council.

The Leader described the Chief Executive, Bindu Arjoon, as a respected leader who demonstrated integrity, intellectual rigor, genuine warmth and approachability with a strong sense of public service. It was noted that she joined the Council in 2006, providing two decades of senior strategic leadership and was appointed Deputy Chief Executive in 2021, leading corporate transformation during a period of significant financial and operational challenge, and became the Council’s first female Chief Executive in 2023.

Members were advised that she had led on a wide range of major service areas, which included: housing, homelessness, planning, business transformation, ICT, HR, corporate strategy, community safety and strategic partnerships. Her work had

strengthened the Council’s financial resilience and governance arrangements, while overseeing significant regeneration programmes supporting housing, economic development and environmental sustainability.

The Chief Executive had been recognised for her steady leadership through the Covid-19 pandemic and cost of living pressures, championing inclusive growth and community wellbeing, and maintaining a strong focus on residents and frontline services. It was noted that she has represented the city regionally and nationally through Local Government Association peer work, contributing to improvement across the wider sector.

In addition to her Executive  ...  view the full minutes text for item 143.

To receive questions from members of the public and responses thereto.

Details of questions should be notified to the Democratic Services by 10am at least three working days prior to the meeting. For this meeting, by 10am on Thursday 26 February 2026.

Further information about speaking at a committee can be found here: Speaking at a Committee or by making contact with Democratic Service via email or 01392 265425.

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

Question from Mrs Jane Smith:  

Post meeting (1/12/2025) a planning officer admitted she had not read the 36 objections but would “have a look”. Vital information was ignored, a significant impact on the outcome. No mention of environment impact (normally included), in spite of e-mail to environment enforcement officer in September. How was vital information ignored and how could residents ensure their concerns were properly heard and considered within the planning process?

The Portfolio Holder for City Development acknowledged the resident’s concerns and apologised that she felt her views had not been heard. However, it was confirmed that all 36 objections submitted in relation to the application were read, assessed and analysed by the planning team prior to the committee meeting, and were considered by Members as part of the published committee report.

It was clarified that no officer had stated that objections had not been read. It was further advised that environmental and ecological matters were fully addressed within the committee report, including impact assessments, habitat and species considerations, biodiversity net gain requirements and associated management plans.

With regard to the reported site works, it was confirmed that this matter was being dealt with separately through the Council’s enforcement process and remained under investigation. Officers were satisfied that the issues raised did not alter the recommendation or the Planning Committee’s decision, which was taken with reference to the full report and all relevant information. She invited Mrs Smith to make further contact for updates if required.

In a supplementary question Mrs Smith acknowledged the response but maintained concerns regarding the accuracy of the developer’s environmental surveys. She stated that she held filmed evidence of wildlife activity within the hedgerows and field which, in her view, contradicted the submitted environmental assessments, and indicated she was willing to share this information.

The Portfolio Holder for City Development responded that she would be happy to receive and review the additional evidence. They expressed confidence that the planning team had presented all relevant information to the Committee but acknowledged the resident’s concerns regarding a lack of response to previous communications and invited her to forward the information directly.

Question from Mr Kris Christmann:  

Why has Exeter City Council (as the principal duty holder for Rougemont Gardens, a Grade II listed historic park) tolerated long-term homeless encampments with tents, open defecation, and associated graffiti damage to the city walls for months—despite available powers under park byelaws, civil remedies, and (previously) Section 4 of the Vagrancy Act 1824—rather than enforcing removal and restoration, or has the park been redesignated as a campsite?

The Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness Prevention and Customer Services responded that the City Council’s housing team regularly visited encampments across the city to offer support and assist individuals into suitable housing. Where antisocial behaviour occurred, notices to leave were issued under the Antisocial Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014; however, such notices must be served to an  ...  view the full minutes text for item 144.

The Minutes of the Audit and Governance Committee of 27 November 2025 were presented by the Chair, Councillor Wardle, and taken as read.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Audit and Governance Committee held on 27 November 2025  were received.

The Minutes of the Customer Focus Scrutiny Committee of 13 November 2025 were presented by the Chair, Councillor Rees, and taken as read.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Customer Focus Scrutiny Committee held on 13 November 2025 were received.

The Minutes of the Customer Focus Scrutiny Committee of 22 January 2026 were presented by the Chair, Councillor Rees, and taken as read.

Councillor Banyard asked which cultural organisations, partners, or individuals were consulted or involved in preparing the City of Culture expression of interest, and whether the expression of interest would be shared with the Council.

Councillor Rees as Chair of Customer Focus Scrutiny Committee expressed enthusiasm for the City of Culture proposals and stated that the Portfolio Holder would be consulted and information regarding which organisations and individuals were involved would be provided.

Councillor Read asked whether it was appropriate that no cultural stakeholders were involved in drafting the City of Culture expression of interest and whether the Council considered this as a suitable approach.

Councillor Rees responded she would consult with the Portfolio Holder and a full response would be provided and made available to all Members.

The Lord Mayor following discussion, advised Members that questions during Council meetings were formally addressed to the chair of the relevant committee. If further detail was needed, the chair may consult with others and any additional responses will be attached to the minutes. The Lord Mayor further emphasised that detailed questioning of Portfolio Holders was normally conducted at scrutiny committee meetings.

The Lord Mayor also confirmed that any Councillor may speak at a committee meeting on any agenda item regardless of committee membership.

(A copy of the questions and responses are appended to the Minutes).

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Customer Focus Scrutiny Committee held on 22 January 2026 were received.

The Minutes of the Strategic Scrutiny Committee of 15 January 2026 were presented by the Chair, Councillor Pole, and taken as read.

Councillor Moore asked for an expected timeline for the introduction of the negotiated stopping policy.

Councillor Pole as the Chair of Strategic Scrutiny Committee advised that the negotiated stopping policy had been referred to the Executive, and an update was pending. She would continue to monitor progress and provide an update when available.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Strategic Scrutiny Committee held on 15 January 2026 were received.

Link to: Appendix B Fees and Charges

The Lord Mayor advised Members that the recommendation for the Licensing Fees and Charges in Minute No. 11 were taken as part of the budget setting meeting held on 25 February 2026 and was voted on accordingly.

Councillor Moore asked about antisocial behaviour, noting that while the committee minutes explained why no changes could be made, she wished to understand how the Council’s wider objectives and licensing objectives could be considered. She requested that the chair ensure the scrutiny committee’s intentions were followed through, particularly in relation to access to alcohol in the city centre and its impact on antisocial behaviour.

Councillor Snow as Chair of Licensing Committee, responded that the minutes (Minute No. 10) clearly outlined the position under the Licensing Act 2003, which did not allow blanket restrictions on licensed activities. Each application must be considered on its individual merits, though cumulative impact areas in parts of the city centre required applicants to demonstrate how they would maintain an orderly operation.

He offered to take any specific points back to the licensing officers for further consideration and confirmed that the actions the Council could take to address antisocial behaviour were clearly set out in the minutes and further information could be provided if requested.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Licensing Committee held on 27 January 2026 were received.

The Minutes of the Planning Committee of 19 January 2026 were presented by the Chair, Councillor Knott, and taken as read.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 19 January 2026 were received.

The minutes of the Strata – Joint Executive of 28 January 2026 were presented by the Leader and taken as read.

The Leader advised that a report relevant to this item was not attached to the minutes. It was therefore agreed that the item would be deferred for consideration at the March meeting.

RESOLVED that the matter be deferred to the meeting on 24 March 2026.

The Lord Mayor advised the recommendations for the following minutes were considered at and voted at the meeting Council budget setting meeting held on 25 February 2026 and would therefore not be debated or voted upon:

·        Minute No. 103 General Fund / HRA Estimates and Capital Programme 2026/27;

·        Minute No. 104 HRA Estimates and Capital Programme 2026/27;

·        Minute No. 105 Capital Strategy 2026-27;

·        Minute No. 106 Treasury Management Strategy Report 2026/27.

·        Minute No. 107 The Prudential Code for Capital Finance.

The minutes of the Executive Committee of 3 February 2026 were presented by the Leader, Councillor Bialyk, and taken as read.

In respect of Minute No. 102 - Exeter Plan: Process for Authorising Proposed Changes Resulting from the examination, the Leader moved the recommendation, seconded by Councillor Wright. Following a vote the recommendations were CARRIED unanimously.

In respect of Minute No. 108 - Local Council Tax Support Scheme 2026/27

In respect of Minute No. 109 – Consultation and Engagement Strategy the Leader moved the recommendation, which was seconded by Councillor Wright. During the debate, the following points were made:

·        the strategy was welcomed as a positive step in strengthening relationships between the Council and the community;

·        there was an importance in establishing clear mechanisms to report back to communities following consultations and asked how this would be implemented;

·        further information on community insights was sought and how these would be shared with Councillors and local communities;

·        there was a need to move beyond small grants and ad hoc networking towards genuine investment in building community capacity;

·        supporting social enterprise organisations as long-term partners was suggested;

·        clarification was sought on how the proposed civic society covenant would operate as a meaningful framework for engagement with the community sector;

·        welcomed the concept of citizen assemblies as a space for deliberative discussion;

·        stressed the importance of two-way dialogue and active listening to improve communication and collaboration with communities;

·        expressed overall support for the strategy and interest in a future iteration being focused on consultation, engagement, and cooperation;

·        the portfolio holder’s commitment to exploring citizen assemblies was welcomed;

·        such initiatives should not be deferred until the new unitary authority was established, which may be more than two years away; and

·        similar arrangements could be implemented sooner, potentially with the shadow authority.

The Portfolio Holder for Climate, Ecological Change and Communities in responding made the following points:

·        many of the points raised were already under discussion;

·        referred to the recent Member briefing on the strategy, which addressed several of these points;

·        expressed personal support in principle for citizen assemblies and confirmed discussions with officers would explore capacity and practical implementation;

·        noted that governance considerations may arise in relation to Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) and the future unitary authority;

·        confirmed that a civic society covenant was being considered in early discussions with the Strategic Director and service portfolio;

·        advised that further work was still required  ...  view the full minutes text for item 152.

To consider the report of the Chief Executive.

The Leader moved the recommendations, seconded by Councillor Wright, and invited the Strategic Director People and Community to introduce the report

The Strategic Director People and Community in presenting the report made the following points:

·        the Annual Pay Policy Statement was a statutory requirement under the Localism Act 2011, in which the full Council must approve and publish it annually before the start of the new financial year;

·        the statement ensured there was full transparency, accountability, and public assurance regarding employee pay;

·        it included details on: Chief Executive pay, definitions of lowest paid employees, pay multipliers and pay governance framework;

·        benchmarking showed that Exeter had a favourable pay ratio between its lowest paid employees (Grade B) and the Chief Executive, performing better than other regional authorities with the lowest ratio; and

·        the recommendation was for Council to approve the Pay Policy Statement and enable its publication.

In summing up the Leader advised Members that the Council adopted the real ‘Living Wage’ as the minimum spinal column point from 1 January 2014 which had served the Council well and was continuing to  work effectively. He expressed hope that all parties representing working-class constituents shared this view and expressed his support for the recommendations.

Following a vote the recommendations were CARRIED. 

To consider 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 in presenting the report made the following points:

·        the report highlighted there were continued financial challenges;

·        the General Fund working balance was projected to fall below its minimum recommended level;

·        with 28 days remaining in the current financial year, the final position would be assessed after year-end and officers would prepare a list of recommendations for Council to consider in June 2026 as part of the outturn reports if any actions were needed;

·        the shortfall was primarily due to delays in implementing planned savings, which were part of a longer term strategy to balance the budget over multiple years; and

·        there had also been some unavoidable costs exceeding the budget, but many of those had been addressed in the recently approved budget.

The Strategic Director for Corporate Resources responded to Members questions as follows:

·        the overall budget for car park income had been between £9.5 million and £10 million of income, and was currently down by £895,000;

·        the car parking fee increase was approved in February and the full-year effect was expected to significantly improve income;

·        some costs had increased such as the Ringgo expansion, but other budget recommendations and a new app contract would help reduce expenses;

·        car parking finances would improve and no additional income assumptions had been built into this year’s budget;

·        regarding final costs for Northbrook, the final closure cost was not yet available and negotiations with the trust were still ongoing;

·        asset maintenance related to rental income at the Civic Centre, which would not improve by the end of the financial year; and

·        a more realistic figure had been included in next year’s budget, which would address the issue going forward.

Following a vote the recommendations were CARRIED. 

To consider 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 in presenting the report made the following points:

·        there were still ongoing challenges like previous quarterly reports;

·        there was a limited expenditure this quarter, with many schemes being deferred to next year’s capital programme;

·        there were no additional capital expenditure requests included in this report;

·        a Capital Programme Board was now in place, which was chaired by the Chief Executive, and was actively monitoring capital spend and the capital programme to move projects forward;

·        finance would be working with Strategic Directors and project managers at year-end to reflect realistic delivery timelines;

·        the capital programme spanned multiple years, so not all projects needed to be completed in the first year; and

·        there was a commitment to producing a more realistic multi-year capital programme going forward.

The Strategic Director for Corporate Resources responded to Members questions as follows:

·        the Capital Board was chaired by the Chief Executive and included the  Strategic Director of Corporate Resources, Strategic Director of Operations, Head of Commercial Assets, Head of Finance, and Head of Asset Maintenance;

·        additional members were invited as required and the board met every two months to review progress on capital projects;

·        key projects were defined as projects of significant cost, value, and importance to the city. Examples included the MRF project approved on 10 February, which was considered to be a key project by the Board;

·        the Board reviewed the full capital program, identified risks and issues, and monitored significant projects;

·        Council funding for the Mallison Bridge project remained in place and allocation and expenditure would be reviewed and managed accordingly;

·        current works on the Topsham Museum focussed on waterproofing and scaffold removal, which was expected to complete before year-end; and

·        the budget did not cover the full long-term cost for Topsham Museum and work was ongoing regarding a long-term lease, with a report expected in the new financial year to outline options.

In summing up the Leader advised Members that the Council was actively working with the museum and maintaining regular communication with Strategic directors and heads of service. He advised that some legal issues remained unresolved, limiting progress on certain matters. He confirmed that board members and local residents were being kept informed and provided assurance that the Council was committed to a collaborative approach with the museum. He further acknowledged frustration over delays but stressed the importance of doing things correctly before moving forward.

Following a vote the recommendations were CARRIED. 

To consider 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 in presenting the report advised that the HRA was performing well with no significant issues to bring to Council’s attention.

Following a unanimous vote the recommendations were CARRIED.

To consider 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 in presenting the report made the following points:

·        the report was requesting approval for a £2.5 million capital budget to enhance and improve the Cathedral Quay multi-storey car park;

·        the car park had required improvements for some time and a recent intrusive structural analysis confirmed the car park was structurally sound, contrary to earlier concerns;

·        given the concerns of the structural analysis had been alleviated, the budget would be used to improve appearance, lighting, and overall user experience as well as upgrading the surrounding landscape;

·        the budget would also enable the re-opening of two and half decks which had been closed for an extended period of time;

·        the site had experienced ongoing antisocial behaviour issues and the proposal sought to outsource the day-to-day operation to a specialist car park managing agent to address operational and safety issues;

·        the Council would retain full control of decisions and all income from the car park;

·        the estimated borrowing cost would be around £158,000 per year and additional revenue was expected from re-opening of the closed decks; and

·        the projected additional income was expected to offset both the borrowing costs and operator fees.

The Strategic Director for Corporate Resources and Head of Service for Commercial Assets responded to Members questions as follows:

·        the recommendation was seeking Council approval to outsource the management of Cathedral Quay car park only and the decision would be made by Council;

·        the recent structural report included an intrusive structural analysis, unlike the report from two years ago and the latest findings were considered more reliable;

·        consultants had confirmed that the car park was structurally sound and met the required standards, even in the unlikely event that it was fully occupied by heavier electric vehicles;

·        the refurbishment works could require the car park to be closed for six months’, though this was not yet confirmed. A phased refurbishment option may allow parts of the car park to remain open, but this would be more complex;

·        it was likely there would be some disruption to nearby businesses during the works but the Council would consult and engage with local traders to minimise disruption as plans developed;

·        although a private operator would be managing the car park, the Council would retain full control over all operational decisions and requirements;

·        the refurbishment provided an opportunity to improve the carpark layout and usability of its spaces, taking into account larger modern vehicles;

·        the aim was to maximise usable spaces and create one of the city’s best multi-storey car parks;

·        to confirm, Members were being asked to approve a £2.5 million capital budget, with the borrowing decisions being delegated to the section 151 officer in consultation with the Council Leader, with updates reported back through normal reporting processes;

·        the main measures proposed to address anti-social behaviour were - installing CCTV, re-opening and providing full usage of the car  ...  view the full minutes text for item 157.

Motion: Reductions to Library Opening Hours

Mover:            Cllr Deborah Darling

Seconder:      Cllr James Cookson

Councillor Darling moved, and Councillor Cookson seconded the Notice of Motion as outlined in the agenda requesting that the Council resolves to:

·       Request that the Leader of the Council write to Devon County Council urging them to reconsider its proposed severe reduction in branch library opening hours that adversely affect Exeter’s residents, especially given the recently announced county council multiyear settlement.

·       Now that the survey consultation has closed, request that Devon County Council consult directly with the staff at Exeter’s branch libraries, before any decisions are made, to explore more modest changes to opening hours based on firsthand knowledge of the way the libraries are used.

·       Encourage Devon County Council to explore options to protect and/or enhance library access and services, for example, by drawing on existing case studies such as those published by Independent Mind. This should also involve an exploration of collaborative opportunities with existing public services, such as the arrangement St Thomas Library has with Theatre Alibi.

·       Request that DCC provide a full Equalities Impact Assessment to decision makers before the decision is made to cut this key public service. It is not enough to simply ask for views on the proposed changes, as stated in the introduction to the consultation.

As Seconder, Councillor Cookson spoke in support of the motion, making the following points:

·        he welcomed Devon County Council’s reversal of the proposed £650,000 library cut, driven by community pressure;

·        restoring funding did not guarantee restoration of access or opening hours;

·        he highlighted concerns over a lack of commitment to reverse reduced staff hours and library opening times;

·        commended the motion to urge for a reconsideration of cuts, direct consultation with staff, exploration of ways to protect/enhance access, and a full Equalities Impact Assessment;

·        he was disappointed with the shift in language from libraries to hubs;

·        he commended the local community efforts, particularly campaigners organising opposition and emphasised the  importance of libraries as essential safe and warm spaces for vulnerable residents; and

·        strongly supported the motion.

During discussion, Members made the following comments on the motion:

·        the motion was welcomed and reaffirmed the importance of libraries;

·        local councillors were credited for identifying funding and helping reverse proposed cuts;

·        the debate had shifted to consultation on opening hours, with significant public engagement;

·        libraries were evolving due to technology and changing community needs;

·        there was limited transition funding from Devon County Council, but was not sufficient for all libraries;

·        it was important to identify stable funding to maintain staffing and opening hours;

·        councillors needed to engage locally on how transition funding could best support libraries;

·        libraries now served as vital community hubs, providing a wide range of services to vulnerable groups, families, and elderly residents;

·        reducing hours would significantly impact community services and access;

·        Councillors Darling and Cookson were thanked for bringing the motion forward;

·        Pinhoe library was facing a reduction in operating hours from 15 to 6 hours ( around a 60% cut);

·        there was a community value with over 9,000 visits in less than a year;  ...  view the full minutes text for item 158.

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 Moore to the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness Prevention and Customer Services:

</AI20>

“I appreciate that the Council listened to St Petrock's to change the methodology so that we get a better picture of how many people are experiencing rough sleeping. The Customer Focus minutes highlight the new strategy which plans tackle homelessness in a more systematic way, and that is expected in the autumn. In the meantime, what is the interim plan to respond to the growing rough sleeping crisis?”

The Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness Prevention and Customer Services responded to this question stating that the increase in reported numbers was largely due to a change in methodology this year, designed to better align with partner organisations and provide a more inclusive and accurate count, meaning the rise appeared greater than it actually was.

In response, a range of improvements were being introduced, including a new “off the streets” offer providing same-day accommodation, a re-designed and more integrated outreach service, and a new commissioning model separating personal support from accommodation to improve stability and engagement.

There would also be gender-specific accommodation, enhanced support pathways for people leaving institutions such as hospital, prison, care, and the armed forces, and an expansion of Housing First and long-term supported housing for those with complex needs.

All current contracts would be replaced with new outcome-focused ones by summer 2026, alongside embedding a trauma-informed approach across services. Overall, these changes aim to deliver a more effective and sustainable reduction in rough sleeping throughout the year.

In asking a supplementary question, Councillor Moore thanked the Portfolio Holder for the response and requested that the information be shared more widely with residents. She noted that many residents were asking about the issue and emphasised the need to reassure the public that the Council was improving how it supported people quickly.

The Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness Prevention and Customer Services agreed with the request to share information with residents and would see about

exploring ways to communicate the updates more widely.

In accordance with Standing Order No.8, the following question was put by Councillor Read to the Deputy Leader & Portfolio Holder for Corporate Services, Community Safety and City Centre:

“It was really interesting to find out recently that there are 58 services which are now only accessed by a digital login to My Exeter, e.g. making a noise complaint, reporting graffiti, ordering a new or replacement bin and 55 other services.

This method of digitally logging into My Exeter to report issues and request Council help puts off many people and potentially creates digital exclusion. I know that ECC is using various different performance indicators for analysing if people are being excluded from services, and that there has just been a review of this, when will the next review be planned for to ensure that no one suffers from an inability to access Council services due to digital exclusion in Exeter”.

The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 159.