Ref	Response method	Responder comments	Ward (if known)	RO reply
1	Portal	I agree fully with the proposed changes.	All	No reply necessary
2	Portal	yes [Redacted] is an amazing councillor and we want to keep [Redacted] for Sussex Square.	Kemptown	Candidate nominations do not fall within the scope of this review.
3	Portal	Re Kemptown ward. Calculating walking distances via Google Maps takes no account of the fact that for people in the most southerly parts of the ward all the polling stations are uphill, even though they may not be far in distance. This is unfair on people with mobility difficulties.	Kemptown	We have been mindful of topographical concerns across the City while conducting this review.  While we are unable to completely mitigate against hills in the City, we have kept steep walks to polling stations to a minimum, and ensured polling stations lie on bus routes where possible. Electors are also able to apply for a postal or proxy vote if they are unable to reach their polling station. We are also limited by the location of existing available venues. We are happy to look at suggestions for alternate polling places, however we believe the proposals for Kemptown strike the right balance for electors across the ward.
4	Portal	The Governors and Headteacher at Coombe Road Primary School welcome the proposal to locate polling stations in Polling District KMBU away from the school. We acknowledge the statutory requirements on the Council and schools, but the closure or partial closure of the school and its co-located nursery on polling days are now incompatible with the DfE's requirements on school attendance and adversely affect the education of our pupils.	Moulsecoomb & Bevendean	We aim to avoid using schools as polling stations, and we are pleased that we have been able to remove Coombe Road Primary School from the scheme. However, we cannot provide assurances that the school won't be used as a polling station in the future if our preferred venues become unavailable or unusable.
5	Portal	I have a postal vote.	Unknown	No reply necessary
6	Portal	Please ensure that topographical considerations are taken into account. For example, Bristol Estate is on top of "The Steepest Hill in Brighton".	Whitehawk & Marina	We have been mindful of topographical concerns across the City while conducting this review.  Bristol Estate lies within the Whitehawk & Marina ward. The longest walk from the estate to the polling station is 11 minutes. The estate is also well served by the number 37 and 37b buses, which stop outside of the polling station.
7	Portal	I do not agree with ID at polling stations	Unknown	The requirement to show photographic identification when voting in person has been introduced by central government. The Electoral Registration and Returning Officer has a statutory obligation to implement it.
8	Portal	I would like to keep my current polling station even if it does not meet all of the new proposals	Unknown	The responder has not indicated what their current polling station is, or whether it is due to change.
9	Portal	the BMECP site is good for people at the top of the polling district but up a steep hill for those on London road	West Hill & North Laine	We have been mindful of topographical concerns across the City while conducting this review.  The BMECP centre is within a 7 minute walk for all electors in the polling district. Electors living on London road currently vote at the BMECP centre and we have not previously received complaints or comments about the polling station's location from these voters.
10	Portal	I am concerned about Bristol Estate as ther are a lot of disabled/elderly fold the who will find it difficult if there is no polling station at the community room	Whitehawk & Marina	We have been mindful of topographical concerns across the City while conducting this review.  Bristol Estate lies within the Whitehawk & Marina ward. The longest walk from the estate to the polling station is 11 minutes. The estate is also well served by the number 37 and 37b buses, which stop outside of the polling station.
11	Email	There is some concern about removing a polling place that serves a traditionally low turnout community in various places. I am not sure why there are so many small and inconvenient changes proposed, such as 2 changes of one street each in Regency seemingly just to even out the sizes. And also using the middle of the road as a boundary which makes no sense	Regency	We have reduced the number of polling places across the City to align with our aim of creating double polling stations. This has meant that some polling places have been removed from the scheme. Our aim has been to ensure that most electors are still within a 15 minute walk of their polling station, which has been met in lower turnout areas.  Moreover, in some areas with lower turnout, some electors are now closer to the new polling places than their previous one. In central wards with a high population density, minor changes to polling district boundaries can have a significant impact on electorate size. We have tried to ensure an even split of electors between polling stations to mitigate the risk of queues in light of Voter ID being implemented from May. We do not have evidence to suggest these minor changes to polling district boundaries present any material inconvenience to electors. Moreover, polling station electors will be receiving up to 3 communications between January and April confirming the location of their polling place. These include - a letter or email regarding Voter ID requirements and the location of their new polling place, a paper poll card and an election information email. The Electoral Registration and Returning Officer now hold email address for more than 75% of the electorate. Polling district and ward boundaries tend to go down the middle of the road rather down the backs of houses. This helps to future proof the scheme, as boundaries that go down the middle of roads are less likely to be impacted by future developments.
12	Portal	We had an issue in HEG in that Elm Grove school was no longer deemed an appropriate location due to inaccessibility.  I'm pleased that BHCC's Wellington Day Centre around the corner has been identified suitable for a single polling station in its place.	Hanover & Elm Grove	No reply necessary
13	Portal	1) I have only reviewed the area of the city which I reside or otherwise connected. I reviewed Preston Park, Round Hill and Hollingdean and Fiveways. This is 12 districts. 2) Of the 12 districts, one of them has less than 1,250 for the polling station (PPPZ – 862 electorates). 3) St Augustines Centre is listed for PPPV in Preston Park and PRHZ in Round Hill. It was not clear to me whether this is 2 polling stations (one for each district) or one in total. If it is only one polling station, then this would exceed 1,750 people per polling station. 4) All appear to have a max walking distance of 15 mins or less. However, I note that Surrenden Park, Friar Road, Friar Crescent and Friar Close in PHFZ appear disconnected from the rest of their district. Indeed, the people living in these roads are likely to consider themselves part of Patcham/Hollingbury or Preston Park. Given that PPPZ in Preston Park seem a bit light on polling place electorate (862), why were those roads not included in that district? I think their current inclusion in PHFZ will cause some confusion with the residents. It should also be noted that residents of those streets will also have to cross a major road to get to their polling station which might otherwise be avoided.	Preston Park, Round Hill and Hollingdean & Fiveways	PPPZ polling district has a smaller electorate than our ideal range. It was considered whether we could include these electors in the PPPY polling district however, due to distance and topography this was not proposed. There will be 2 polling stations at St Augustine's. One for PPPV and the other for PRHZ. The electors of PHFZ were previously in Withdean ward along with those of PPPZ. The ward boundary review placed these areas in Hollingdean & Fiveways and Preston Park wards respectively. Their polling districts and polling places therefore reflect these new wards. It is appreciated that electors in PHFZ will need to cross Ditchling Road to vote. There are Pelican crossings available to cross this road.
14	Email	I do know that Possability People spells their name like that deliberately (I think because they are about 'ability not disability') so you may need to train your spell checker. One point I omitted in my comments below is the proposed constituency boundary change in the Hanover/Pankhurst area. We are pleased that the BCE has adopted the "minimal change" option of transferring the Pankhurst area of HEG ward into Brighton Kemptown.  But the Commission has invited further comments on whether the boundary should follow the pre-existing polling district, or should simply be set along Queen's Park Road, so that the roads including Baxter Street and down to Luther street should remain in Pavilion with the rest of Hanover.  Therefore you might want to divide your *HEV polling district along QP Road so that whichever version is finally adopted the register will be ready. I hope the final proposals for polling districts will be considerably better than the one you have published, there are far too many horrors mostly splitting streets for very little benefit and a lot of confusion likely.	All	We have reduced the number of polling places across the City to align with our aim of creating double polling stations. This has meant that some polling places have been removed from the scheme. Our aim has been to ensure that most electors are still within a 15 minute walk of their polling station, which has been met in lower turnout areas.  Moreover, in some areas with lower turnout, some electors are now closer to the new polling places than their previous one. Due to the ward boundary changes and the introduction of Voter ID, this review has proposed a significant amount of change compared with recent reviews. However, street splits were not uncommon within the previous scheme nor the previous warding. To ensure that electors are well informed of the changes - polling station electors will receive up to 3 communications between January and April confirming the location of their polling place. These include - a letter or email regarding Voter ID requirements and the location of their new polling place, a paper poll card and an election information email. The Electoral Registration and Returning Officer now hold email address for more than 75% of the electorate. The Returning Officer appreciates that PHEV/KHEV could be split into different constituencies in the final BCE recommendations. However, should a split along Queen's Park Road occur then we will want to have a more comprehensive look at all the polling districts in the ward. Moreover, should we split the district now then this will slow the issuing process at The Edge Community Centre by requiring poll clerks to right the polling district code on the Corresponding Number List when issuing a ballot paper. Polling district and ward boundaries tend to go down the middle of the road rather down the backs of houses. This helps to future proof the scheme, as boundaries that go down the middle of roads are less likely to be impacted by future developments.
15	Email	At present the postal service is very poor. Today I had my first delivery this month, 25 items. If this is still the case in April/ May the postal vote situation could be very unreliable!!	All	No reply necessary
16	Email	I am a bit concerned that two very unequal polling districts have been created in CH ward.	Central Hove	Central Hove has historically had uneven polling districts with the majority of the electorate voting at Hove Town Hall. The new boundaries have been altered to allow for the new ward boundary and to ensure that our ideal electorate range is met.
17	Email – multiple with responses	This polling district is showing 2 polling stations but only one address. Court farm road is a long way away if you are in the Goldstone Valley. St George’s Hall is too close to Bishop Hannington.	Westdene & Hove Park	The polling place would be St George’s Hall for the whole area. The previous polling place for Goldstone Valley was St Peter’s Church on Hangleton Road which is round the corner from the new location but doesn’t have a car park. Bishop Hannington is at the bottom of Holmes Avenue – not the one on the corner of Nevill Avenue and Holmes Avenue. They are therefore not particularly close. Moreover, in some localities venues will be close together but serving different communities. This is because we must work to where there are suitable venues.
		This polling district is showing 2 polling stations but only one address. Court farm road is a long way away if you are in the Goldstone Valley. St George’s Hall is too close to Bishop Hannington.		This is a new polling district which combines the electors from Goldstone Valley and Woodland Drive. Due to the size of the electorate we are proposing there will be a double polling station operating from St George’s Hall. St George’s Hall replaces St Peter’s Church (for Goldstone Valley electors) and Nevill Cricket Pavilion (for Woodland Drive electors). We think St George’s Hall provides electors with a more accessible venue with good parking facilities – with both a car park and on road parking available. Those driving to Nevill Cricket Pavilion previously had to use the one way system (shared with Dolphin Nursery and Aldrington CE School) to exit the recreation ground on Nevill Avenue. The venue also had reduced accessibility to the tight turning circle for users of wheelchairs and mobility scooters. Before the polling place was moved to the cricket pavilion, electors around Woodland Drive had to vote at portacabins on the Hove Park School site – accessed from Old Shoreham Road. This had led to electors parking on double yellow lines along Old Shoreham Road.
		Does the council propose to run these recommendations through a particular committee? This is a non-partisan process and our job is to ensure that residents do not experience major barriers to go to vote, or even where it’s just inconvenient for them to go to vote. We must use this process to fix this, and honestly, I am more interested in residents voting than in some parking on double yellows for 10 minutes while doing so. I say this because the council has a policy of ignoring infractions on double yellows across the city for longer than that. Can we please explore options for the Goldstone Valley?		Following the consultation period, a report and final scheme will go to Policy & Resources Committee. I can confirm that polling place options have already been considered across the city – including Goldstone Valley. The result of this is the draft scheme and consultation document. The electors of Goldstone Valley have voted at St Peter’s on Hangleton Road from at least 2009 (this is where my records begin). We have had no complaints from electors regarding the location of their polling station. However, during the course of our review we identified St George’s Hall as an alternative as this provided better accessibility and could form a double polling station with the electors around Woodland Drive. St George’s Hall is a short distance from the previous polling place. We have not identified any alternatives within the area of Goldstone Valley - with no churches or community centres in the area.