Agenda and minutes

To record apologies for absence and the attendance of substitute members.  

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor Turner (with Councillor Cooper attending as substitute) and Councillor Filipova-Rivers.

To adopt and sign as a correct record the Community Governance and Electoral Issues Committee minutes of the meeting held on 25 May 2022.

RESOLVED: to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 25 May 2022 as a correct record and agree that the Chair sign them as such.

To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests and any conflicts of interest in respect of items on the agenda for this meeting.  

Councillor Mocky Khan declared an interest in agenda item 12 – Community Governance Review – Didcot, as a Didcot Town Councillor (see minute 25).

To receive notification of any matters which the chair determines should be considered as urgent business and the special circumstances which have made the matters urgent, and to receive any announcements from the chair.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting. There was no urgent business.

To receive any questions or statements from members of the public that have registered to speak. 

Councillor Suter, Chairman of Great Haseley Parish Council, made a statement to the committee, which is set out under minute 23, Thame and Great Haseley.

Councillor Havel, made a statement to the committee, which is set out under minute 25, Didcot.

To consider the report of the head of legal and democratic and agree final recommendations on a number of community governance review matters – attached.

The committee considered the head of legal and democratic’s report on six community governance reviews.  The committee had agreed to undertake the reviews at its meeting in February 2022 and agreed terms of reference on matters submitted by parish councils.  In May, the committee had agreed draft proposals for consultation and agreed revised terms of reference to provide for a longer consultation period and time to analyse the responses. 

Consultation had been carried out on proposals in each of the reviews.  A schedule setting out the detail on each review was attached as a separate agenda item, along with the consultation results, an officer recommendation, and the justification for that recommendation.  The committee was invited to agree the final recommendations for implementation.  The minutes for each review are shown below. 

The committee noted that after it had taken its final decisions on each community governance review, work would commence to make the necessary order to bring the changes into effect in time for the 2023 parish council elections.  This included making applications to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England to make related alteration orders to make district wards and county divisions coterminous with such changes.  In July 2022, Council had authorised the head of legal and democratic, in consultation with the chair of this committee, to submit any such applications to the boundary commission. 

RESOLVED: to

(a)       agree final recommendations in relation to each item below in minutes 20 to 25; and

(b)       authorise the head of legal and democratic to make a reorganisation of community governance order to implement the changes agreed. 

The committee considered the community governance review CGR-A on a proposal to create a single ward covering Cuddesdon and Denton Parish Council. 

The committee considered that Cuddesdon and Denton was an integrated community and that the warding arrangements, introduced when Cuddesdon Parish Council and Denton Parish Meeting became a single parish council, were not required to address separate community identities or to achieve effective and convenient representation. 

RESOLVED: to remove the current warding arrangements for Cuddesdon and Denton Parish Council. 

The committee considered the community governance review CGR-B on a proposal to transfer Swiss Farm Touring and Camping site from Bix and Assendon parish to Henley-on-Thames parish.

The democratic services manager advised the committee that, since the publication of the agenda, Bix and Assendon Parish Council had confirmed that it had no objection to the proposed boundary change.

The committee noted that no objections had been received to the proposal from affected residents with three expressing support, no objection from Bix and Assendon Parish Council and support from Henley-on-Thames Town Council for the proposal.

The committee agreed the proposal because it would serve the identities and interests of the residents and provide effective and convenient representation at local government level.

RESOLVED: to transfer Swiss Farm Touring and Camping site from Bix and Assendon parish to Henley-on-Thames parish within the Henley-on-Thames North Ward.

The committee considered the community governance review CGR-C on a request to increase the size of Sonning Common Parish Council from 12 to 15.

The committee noted that the number of parish councillors on Sonning Common Parish Council exceeded the number considered appropriate in the National Association of Local Council (NALC) guidance. The committee had seen no evidence to support an increase in the current size of the parish council.

RESOLVED: to make no change to the number of parish councillors for Sonning Common Parish council. 

Councillor Tim Sutter, Chairman of Great Haseley Parish Council, made a statement reiterating Great Haseley Parish Council’s objection to any change to the parish boundary.

The committee considered the community governance review CGR-D, on a proposal to amend the parish boundary to include land currently within Great Haseley parish within Thame parish.

The committee agreed to make no change to the parish boundary because such a change would not address issues of the identity and interests of the local community or the effective and convenient representation of local residents.

RESOLVED: to make no change to the parish boundary between Thame parish and Great Haseley parish. 

The committee considered the community governance review CGR-E on a proposal to revise the town council ward boundaries for the purposes of parish council elections. 

The committee agreed the proposed change to the town council ward boundaries to provide for a better electoral balance between the wards in the interest of achieving effective and convenient local government representation and to provide for a more logical division of the parish.

RESOLVED: to amend the town council ward boundaries as set out in the map attached to the report schedule of the head of legal and democratic to the Community Governance and Electoral Issues Committee held on 10 October 2022.

Councillor Mocky Khan declared an interest in this item as a Didcot Town Councillor, and as such did not take part in the decision-making on this item. 

Councillor Victoria Haval addressed the committee in her capacity as a town councillor for the Ladygrove town ward. She opposed the revised proposal which would reduce the number of town councillors for Ladygrove ward from seven to six councillors at a time when development is increasing within the ward and would result in an imbalance in electoral representation in the future.

With only two members of the committee entitled to vote on this item, and with no agreement on a proposal, the committee agreed to defer this item to a future meeting of the committee. 

The Local Government and Public Involvement and Health Act 2007 provides for principal councils to conduct a community governance review (CGR) at any time.

 The relevant guidance, issued by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England and the Department for Communities and Local Government, suggests that principal councils will want to keep their community governance arrangements under review. The guidance goes on to offer the following advice on what might trigger a CGR:

·       it can be helpful to undertake community governance reviews in circumstances such as where there have been changes in population, or in reaction to specific or new local issues

·       communities may expand with new housing developments over time. This can often lead to existing parish boundaries becoming anomalous as new houses are built across the boundaries resulting in people being in different parishes from their neighbours. In such circumstances, the council should consider undertaking a community governance review

·       councils should exercise their discretion, but it is good practice to consider conducting a review every 10-15 years

There is also provision for a community governance review to be triggered by a petition for the whole or part of the council’s area, but this is subject to rules around previous CGR's carried out by the principal council.

In 2017 this committee agreed to undertake a community governance review every four years after the scheduled parish council elections, with any agreed changes implemented in time for the next scheduled elections. 

Officers experience since 2017 has been that undertaking reviews every four years is a very resource intensive for the elections team and other service teams which support the reviews.  Furthermore, undertaking a review every four years, generally invites parish councils to consider and submit speculative requests often on a repeat basis. A number of the matters considered generate little interest from the public.  

The guidance states that principal councils should consider the benefits of undertaking a review of the whole of its area in one go, rather than carrying out small scale reviews in a piecemeal fashion of smaller areas, recognising that occasionally specific reviews, for example to adjust minor parish boundary anomalies, may be appropriate. Committing to undertake a review every four years is contrary to the above guidance, is unnecessary, and as can be seen from the most recent review, causes tension between parish councils.   

Officers firmly recommend that the council relies on the statutory guidance provided on the timing of a community governance review, including the provision for a district wide review every 10-15 years. The committee will know that it is perfectly acceptable and possible for specific reviews to be carried out to address anomalies.

 RECOMMENDATION

That the committee authorises the democratic services manager to carry out future reviews at timescales provided for in the government guidance in consultation with the chair of the committee.

Officers presented a proposal to amend the requirement to carry out community governance reviews every four years.  In 2017 the committee had agreed to undertake a community governance review every four years after the scheduled parish council elections, with any agreed changes implemented in time for the next scheduled elections.  However, this had proved resource intensive.  It also invited parish councils to consider and submit speculative requests, often on a repeat basis. 

Legislation enables community governance reviews to be conducted at any time.  Guidance issued by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England and the Department for Communities and Local Government suggested that reviews could be triggered by:

·        changes in population, or in reaction to specific or new local issues

·        new housing developments expanding communities over time

·        councils exercising their discretion, but conducting a review every 10 to 15 years

·        a petition for the whole or part of the council’s area, subject to rules around previous reviews carried out by the principal council 

The guidance suggested that councils should consider undertaking a community governance review of its whole area in one go, rather than carrying out small scale reviews in a piecemeal fashion of smaller areas.  However, specific reviews could be undertaken at any time, for example to adjust minor parish boundary anomalies. 

Following an exchange of views, the committee agreed to defer consideration of this item until a future meeting when more members of the committee would be in attendance. 

The purpose of this item is toset out the process required for a review of the district council boundaries and provide further clarification that it is not a matter for a community governance review.

As members will be aware from the current CGR_ G review, Didcot Town Council resolved, at its meeting on 7 March 2022, that:

“The whole of Great Western Park to be within the Didcot boundaries and under the remit of Didcot Town Council”. 

At its meeting held on 27 June 2022 (minute 38) Didcot Town Council resolved the following:

“Didcot Town Council wants to resolve the boundary issues regarding Great Western Park. Didcot Town Council resolved that the Leader writes to inform the Boundary Commission and other relevant stakeholders to review and finalise the boundary so that Great Western Park resides under one District Council”.

The issue was also raised at South Oxfordshire District Council’s meeting on 14 July 2022.

As previously explained at meetings of the Community Governance and Electoral Issues Committee and as part of this agenda (CGR_G), parishes must fall within the boundaries of a single principal council area. Therefore, it is not possible to include the area of Great Western Park in Vale of White Horse District Council within Didcot parish. To achieve such an outcome, it would be necessary to alter the district council boundary. Such a review can only be undertaken by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England via a Principal Area Boundary Review (PABR).   

The types of PABR are outlined in the guidance available at: https://s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/lgbce/Corporate%20Documents/Guidance/PABR%20Guidance%20and%20Letter%20Combined%20(002)_Redacted.pdf

As you will see from pages 12 and 13 of the guidance such a review is likely to fall within the medium or large-scale review “type” – more likely large-scale. The guidance makes clear that a request to review the boundaries of principal area must be submitted by all the principal councils concerned – in this case, South Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse district councils. The request would need to demonstrate the benefits of the proposed change, set out the financial implications and evidence of the support of the local community. Any change to the principal area boundaries would still require a further review of parish council arrangements by the relevant district council.

RECOMMENDATION: to note the above process for the review of principal area boundaries. 

The committee noted an agenda item on the process required for a review of the district council boundaries.

The committee requested that all members of the council receive details of the agenda item prior to the Council meeting on 13 October at which a motion on this matter had been submitted.

RESOLVED: to note the process for the review of principal area boundaries.