Skip to main content

Communities Scrutiny Panel (Special) 23rd November 2023

8:40 am, Wednesday, 28th February 2024 - 2 months ago

Present:   

Councillor Westcott (in the Chair)       

Councillors Batson, Boyd (substitute for Sandford) Brasted (substitute for K.Swinburn) Farren, Shutt

 

Officers in attendance:

  • Gemma Broderick (Solicitor, Law, and Governance)
  • Laura Cowie (Elections Manager)
  • Stephen McGrath (Strategic Special Projects Lead – Communities)
  • Jo Paterson (Scrutiny and Committee Advisor)
  • Sophie Pickerden (Scrutiny and Committee Support Officer)
  • Eve Richardson Smith (Service Manager Consultancy and Deputy Monitoring Officer)

Also in attendance:  

Councillor Hayden Dawkins, (Portfolio Holder for Culture, Heritage and the Visitor Economy)

There were no members of the press present.

A member asked that it be noted that a member of the public had attended the meeting however the hearing loop provided in the room was not functioning properly.

SPC.43      APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for  absence were received for this meeting from Councillors Aisthorpe, Astbury, K. Swinburn and Sandford.

SPC.44      DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest in relation to any items on the agenda.

SPC.45   PARISH COUNCIL COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE REVIEW  

The panel considered a report from the Assistant Chief Executive which advised the panel of the submissions received during the second period of public consultation (8th September to 3rd November 2023) on the Parish Council Community Governance Review.

Mr McGrath set out the background to the report and took members through each individual parish council and the feedback from the consultation. The full comments were set out in Appendix 2 of the report.  

Mr McGrath explained that an additional proposal to change the parish council boundary between Waltham and Barnoldby Le Beck had been put forward as below:-

  • Option 1 is current boundary (no change)
  • Option 2 moves boundary to Bradley Road, so the five properties from Waltham move into Barnoldby Le Beck
  • Option 3 considers the numerous houses on the Barnoldby Le Beck side of Bradley Road as a Waltham overspill and moves the area into Waltham.

It was noted that any change to the boundary would require the Council to undertake a further round of  consultation as this would have a financial impact in terms of the parish precept.

Members sought clarification on the location of the parish boundary on the map provided and where this fell within the ward boundaries. In response to queries Mr McGrath explained that ward boundaries were dealt with by the boundary commission and any change to these would overrule the parish boundary.

A short debate ensued with members considering the different options and financial impact of any changes to properties and also wished to apply a logic view around where the parish boundary should be placed. Members also felt consideration be given to the size of the parish councils when moving the boundary.

Mr McGrath explained that if Council agreed to consult, the Elections Team would write to all households in Barnoldby Le Beck and Waltham, as well as both parish councils, to seek their views on the proposals. The Chair added that the proposal had been well publicised in the media.

It was proposed and seconded that the Council go out to consultation on the three options proposed above and report back to this panel on 22nd February 2024.  The Panel would then make recommendations to Council on 14th March 2024 regarding this parish boundary.

Waltham Parish Council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation noting that ten people voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  Two felt that the number of parish councillors should be changed.  Three felt that the boundary should be changed.  Two had no opinion.  Seven people gave comments in favour of the proposal, with comments like the parish council works well, reflects the electorate and no reason to change.  Three comments were received about the parish council boundary.  One felt it should be smaller and two felt that the houses on Bradley Road should be incorporated into Waltham.  The person who had no opinion explained that they did not know why we had parish councils.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That the Council go out to consultation on the 3 options below and come back to the panel on 22nd February:-

  • Option 1 is current boundary (no change)
  • Option 2 moves boundary to Bradley Road, so the five properties from Waltham move into Barnoldby Le Beck
  • Option 3 considers the numerous houses on the Barnoldby Le Beck side of Bradley Road as a Waltham overspill and moves the area into Waltham.

Barnoldby Le Beck Parish Council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation and highlighted that there had been no votes or comments received.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That the Council go out to consultation on the 3 options below and come back to the panel on 22nd February:-

  • Option 1 is current boundary (no change)
  • Option 2 moves boundary to Bradley Road, so the five properties from Waltham move into Barnoldby Le Beck
  • Option 3 considers the numerous houses on the Barnoldby Le Beck side of Bradley Road as a Waltham overspill and moves the area into Waltham.

Ashby Cum Fenby Parish Council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation and highlighted that there had been one person voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  No written comments were received.

The panel considered there were no known issues with the parish council and felt no change was required.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That no changes to existing governance or electoral arrangements be made to Ashby Cum Fenby Parish Council.

Bradley Parish Council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation noting that one person voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  Two individuals stated that they do not know or had no opinion.  The Parish Council has written in favour of the proposal but asked for the boundary to be kept under review.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That no changes be made to existing governance or electoral arrangements for Bradley Parish Council.

Brigsley Parish Council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation noting that one person voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  That individual confirmed that the parish council was the right size and incorporated all properties.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That no changes be made to existing governance or electoral arrangements for Brigsley Parish Council.

Great Coates Village Council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation six people voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  Two felt there should be a change to the number of parish councillors and one felt there should be a change to the parish boundary.  Three people stated that they did not know or had no opinion.  Six comments were received.  One felt there should be a reduction in the number of parish councillors if the roles are paid.  Another highlighted the issue of the village hall.  Three agreed with the proposal.  The final person felt the village council should come under Grimsby as they were only interested in running the village hall and in-bloom.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That no changes be made to existing governance or electoral arrangements for Great Coates Village Council.

Habrough Parish council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the consultation noting that two people voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  One felt there should be a change to the parish boundary and another did not know or had no opinion.  No written comments were received.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That no changes be made to existing governance or electoral arrangements for Habrough Parish Council.

Healing Parish Council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation noting that six people voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  One person did not know or had no opinion.  Two written comments were received in favour of the proposal, albeit one pointed out a shortage of parish councillors.  The other felt the parish council seemed to work and noted the village was expanding.

A Member commented on the potential expansion of Healing village and how this affected expansion of the boundary. Mr McGrath explained that the size of the village would be kept under review and any considerable change to its size would be brought back to the panel.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That no changes be made to existing governance or electoral arrangements for Healing Parish Council.

Humberston Village Council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation noting that five people voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  Two did not know or had no opinion.  Two written comments were received in favour of the proposal.  One stated that Humberston was a village and should not expand.  The other had attended a few parish council meetings and felt the parish councillors were doing a reasonable job.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That no changes be made to the existing governance or electoral arrangements for Humberston Parish Council.

Immingham Town Council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation noting 40 individuals voted in favour of the north/south town ward split, with 16 against and 2 having no opinion.  35 individuals voted in favour of retaining 15 Town Ward Councillors, with 14 against and 7 having no opinion.  The numerous written comments received to both questions are set out in full in Appendix 2.

Members took a vote on implementing the North and South town split  and to retain the existing 15 town ward councillors.

It was noted that both Ward Councillors for Immingham supported the proposals at the previous meeting.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:

1.That  the current town wards be removed and replaced with two new Town Wards north and south of Pelham/Habrough Road with effect from the next Full Parish Council elections in May 2027.

2.That the existing 15 town ward councillors be retained with 7 Town Councillors representing the North Town Ward and 8 Town Councillors representing the South Town Ward.

Irby Parish Council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation noting that one person voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  No written comments were received.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That no changes be made to the governance or electoral arrangements for Irby Parish Council.

Laceby Parish Council

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation noting that six people voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  One person did not know or had no opinion.  One person wrote in favour of the proposal, stating that Laceby was growing rapidly.

It was noted that Laceby Parish Council had recently changed their name toLaceby ‘Village’ Council and had duly notified all relevant departments.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That no changes be made to existing governance or electoral arrangements for Laceby Village Council.

New Waltham Parish Council

MrMcGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation noting that three people voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  One felt that there should be a change to the parish council boundary, and another had no opinion.  Two written comments were received.  One felt that the parish council should merge with Humberston, Waltham and Cleethorpes to form Cleethorpes Town Council.  The second responder had no problem with either proposal.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That no change to existing governance or electoral arrangements be made to New Waltham Parish Council.

Stallingborough Parish Council 

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation noting that five people voted in favour of the proposal to maintain the size of the parish council and the parish boundary.  One felt that there should be a change to the parish boundary.  Another felt that the number of parish councillors should be reduced, which was confirmed in their written comment.  Another individual had no opinion.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That no changes be made to existing governance or electoral arrangements for Stallingborough Parish Council.

Requests for New Parish Councils

Mr McGrath outlined the feedback and noted that the requests for new parish councils and why the respondents felt these were needed are set out in Appendix 2 in the report presented to this panel on 15th August 2023.

He further outlined the feedback from the second round of consultation noting that eight people felt that the Council was wrong not to consider requests for new parish councils, with a further one stating that parish council representation could be useful.  The views were set out in full in Appendix 2 to this report.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL: That based on the feedback, no new parish councils be set up at present.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:

That Council receives and notes the feedback received during the second consultation phase of the parish council community governance review as set out in Appendix 2.

There being no further business, the Chair declared the meeting closed at 2:51 p.m.