Issue - items at meetings - Update on Administrative Boundary Review at Saltdean

Report of the Acting Director of Strategy & Governance (copy attached).

RESOLVED –

(1)         That the Committee notes the report.

(2)         That officers be instructed to continue to liaise with the Local Government Boundary Commission for England over the timescale for a potential review.

(3)         That officers be instructed to bring a further report to Governance Committee when the Commission’s capacity and capability to carry out a review becomes known.

(4)         That officers be instructed to update the Local Government Boundary Commission with the resolutions of the Committee following consideration of this report.

28.1    The Committee considered a report from the Acting Director of Strategy & Governance regarding the Update on Administrative Boundary Review at Saltdean.

28.2    The Senior Solicitor, Mr Dixon gave a summary of the report and noted that the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) was still developing guidance and policies, but had the prospect of a Saltdean review as a live issue. Whilst East Sussex County Council had reserved their position with regards to the costs of a review, both they and Lewes District Council supported the principle of the idea.

28.3    The Chairman welcomed Mr O’Connor from Saltdean Residents Association to the meeting and invited him to address the Committee.

28.4    Mr O’Connor thanked the Committee for their time given to this issue and agreed with the contents of the report presented today. The Saltdean Residents Association (SRA) had raised this issue with local councils in the area, including the Telscombe and Peacehaven Town Councils and none had disagreed with the principles of the aim, even though the loss of Saltdean from its area would constitute a loss of 40% of income for Telscombe Town Council.

            He noted that a survey of residents regarding  this issue was not needed at the moment, as the LGBCE was still developing its policies, but he felt that it would raise the profile of the issue, and keep the momentum going. Because of this, Mr O’Connor asked that Brighton & Hove City Council consider running a website survey for residents to respond to, and noted that the SRA already had developed their own website survey, as had the Town Councils. From the initial findings 44% would wish to join Lewes District Council, 39% would wish to join Brighton & Hove City Council, 11% did not want unification either way and 6% were unsure but supported the idea of unification. Mr O’Connor felt that this showed there was a consensus of opinion for unification one way or another.

28.5    The Chairman stated that officers would continue to check with the LGBCE and if the situation changed more quickly than expected regarding the development of its policies and procedures than that would open up many possibilities and the Council would give the community its full support.

28.6    Councillor Mears felt that an online survey was quite feasible and she supported this. She understood the community’s frustrations with the current situation and felt it needed to be resolved. The Chairman suggested an element of liaison and matching with the SRA’s website survey should take place.

28.7    Councillor Smith asked if the survey would be open to anyone for comment, or would be restricted to the residents of Saltdean. The Acting Director of Strategy & Governance replied that there were no prescriptive rules or restrictions regarding who could participate in surveys, but it was good practice to only analyse responses from local people. This could be done by the requirement in the survey to state a postcode.

28.7    Councillor Mitchell felt that the momentum to this issue needed to be kept high, but she was concerned that an online survey might make residents feel like they had already voted on the issue and raise unrealistic expectations. She hoped that the LGBCE developed their policies quickly to avoid this problem.

28.8    Councillor West agreed and felt that whilst an online survey was a good idea he felt that residents might expect that extra weight be given to the results, and online surveys excluded those who did not have access to a computer. He believed it was necessary to ensure residents were aware that the purposes of the survey was merely to extend the debate and was not a proper survey.

28.9    The Chairman agreed that not everyone did have an opportunity to access a computer but noted there was computer access in libraries. It was likely that the LGBCE would come to a decision by April next year and the online survey would keep the issue alive.

28.10  Councillor Mears understood the concerns of other Councillors but felt that an online survey was clearly very different in nature to a referendum. The survey would highlight to residents its limited purpose however.

28.11  RESOLVED -

            1.         That the Committee notes the report.

2.         That officers be instructed to continue to liaise with the Local Government Boundary Commission for England over the timescale for a potential review.

3.         That officers be instructed to bring a further report to the Governance Committee when the Commission’s capacity and capability to carry out a review becomes known.

4.         That officers be instructed to update the Local Government Boundary Commission with the resolutions of the Committee following consideration of this report.