Agenda item

Report of the Leader

The Leader of the Council introduced the report which had been triggered when a campaign group in Pittville submitted a valid petition to Cheltenham Borough Council in January 2017, calling for the creation of a new parish council for Pittville.  This requires the authority under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 to carry out a community governance review to decide whether or not a new parish council should be created.   The review must take place within 12 months of receipt of the petition. 

As part of the review, it will also be possible to address two very small areas:

•           An anomaly in Merestones Drive (see parapraph 2.3)

•           Part of St Nicholas Drive (8 properties), which is the only part of Prestbury ward not to be in Prestbury parish, and would be between Prestbury and Pittville parishes if the new parish council in Pittville is created.  

It was proposed that a cross party working group was set up to manage the review. The Leader suggested that those who were actively campaigning for or against the formation of a parish for Pittville should not be members of the working group but would be able to give their views.   

The Leader reminded members that a previous working group 5 years ago had concluded that there should be a process to enable all parishes to review their boundaries by 2018. It was sensible to complete this review at the same time although it was not a statutory requirement as was the request relating to the petition.

The following points were made in the debate:

• There was a suggestion that the working group should be chaired by a totally independent chair
• Parish councils have statutory rights to be consulted on planning and other matters and consideration should be given to how neighbourhood projects in other more deprived areas of the town and the town centre should be consulted on matters affecting them
• Charlton Kings Parish Council had been very disappointed in the result of the 2012 review and would like some assurance that the revised suggestions they have made for boundary changes will come speedily to a review.
• There was a concern that Midwinter allotments would in future only be available to residents of the Pittville Parish, particularly from residents of St Pauls and existing allotment holders should be consulted as stakeholders in the review.
• Can the costs of the review be recouped from Pittville Parish council if it is set up?
• The proposed boundaries of the Pittville Parish council seem to disenfranchise some residents of the Pittville ward by not including them.
• The pros and cons of setting up the parish council should be clearly set out for residents in a neutral information sheet.
• Different communities have different needs and want to engage in different ways and it is for local residents to decide.

Members were reminded that the resolution before them today was to set up a working group to consider the petition that had been received and not to debate its merits.

In his summing up the Leader supported the suggestion for an information sheet to be circulated to local residents so they could decide. He had no problem in principle with an independent chair and was happy to look at this further but would not want this to delay the review which was scheduled to report back to council in June. He noted that the issue regarding allotments was clearly an important one to be considered as part of the review and the point about recouping costs of the review was also noted.

Councillor Harman advised that Councillors Seacome would be the Conservative nomination for the working group.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY

1.    The terms of reference for the Community Governance Review (to include Pittville and the properties in St Nicholas Drive and Merestones Drive) be approved and published as soon as possible after approval.   The terms of reference are attached as Appendix 2. 

2.    That a cross party working group be set up to oversee the  Community Governance Review (with terms of reference as attached at Appendix 4) and to report back to Council with its recommendations. 

3.    The Head of Paid Service be authorised to take such steps and actions as are necessary to facilitate an effective Community Governance Review.