Notes from Boundary Committee Presentation

Welcome to the Towards One Council Website, a one stop shop for all news relating to the transition to one council for Wiltshire.

Have Your Say

For general enquiries please email the Communications team.

For website problems please email the Webteam.

Notes from Boundary Committee Presentation - 15 February 2008

County and District Councillors (10am)

Speakers: Powerpoint Presentation

Tim Kershaw – Review Manager

Jessica Metheringham – Review Officer

Issues raised/responses:

Proposals for electoral divisions which exceed 10% tolerance levels will need strong justification
BC does not take into account cllr: elector ratio comparison with other councils, as every area is different; they don’t want to impose council sizes
The CC is starting with a council size of 98 members as this was in the submission for unitary status, but this needs to be justified according to the role members will play in new council.
98 members gives aprox 3700 electors per councillor considering 2012 projections. Some members expressed a wish for different council sizes to be examined.
BC will consider single or multi member wards but the County Council’s current proposal is concentrating on single member divisions.
Military personnel under registration is not taken into consideration, it can be used as an argument but not strong if under 10%. Regarding more settled communities to arrive at Bulford, Tidworth and Larkhill, BC have to go on current registrations and projections.
Rural areas will not be given more councillors just because councillors have to cover large geographic areas, electoral equality is more important. Again you can argue this but it will not be a strong argument.
BC view is that community areas are not set in stone, and can be changed to fit in with new electoral arrangements if necessary. Community area boundaries are not a matter for the BC although evidence around community identity will be taken into consideration.
However community areas are an important part of the unitary bid, and used by other public sector partners, and will be kept to as much as possible when the CC is drafting arrangements.
Naming of new unitary divisions is very much an issue both the CC and BC would like local input on.
BC clarified that external parish boundaries will not change but some parishes, mainly in towns, may need to be rewarded internally to allow electoral equality.

Town and Parish Councils (1pm)

Speakers: Powerpoint Presentation

Tim Kershaw – Review Manager

Jessica Metheringham – Review Officer

Issues raised/responses:

Reliability of 2012 projection figures questions. These were worked out by CC and verified by districts. Further information about how the projections were calculated is attached.
Parishes currently on edge of community areas, which may have already changed community areas at least once, commented that they may have a preference for a certain community area. Town and Parish Councils will be able to make their views know as part of the consultation process.
Polling districts and centres can be changed. It is therefore not convincing to argue on access to current polling centres.

NB: Many other issues not related directly to the BR, and not within the remit of the Boundary Committee were raised. These, such as opposition to reorganisation, have not been recorded.

Timeline up to Submission:

Approximate date	Activity
mid March	Formal consultation with District, Town and Parish Councils (in writing)
18th April	Special Full County Council Meeting to sign off proposal for submission to Boundary Committee.
22nd April	Submission to be made to Boundary Committee