MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
General Purposes Group
Friday 24 October 2014
REPORT OF Head of Finance & resources
Report prepared by Kathy Hildige
1. Broomfield & Kingswood and Sutton Valence Parish Councils Increase Number of Councillors
1.1 Issue for Decision
1.1.1 Under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 (LGPIH Act 2007) s94 the Council has received requests to consider an increase in the number of parish councillors on Broomfield and Kingswood Parish Council and on Sutton Valence Parish Council.
1.2 Recommendation of Head of Finance & Resources
1.2.1 That the General Purposes Group recommend to Council that, in accordance with the adopted scale, the request of both Broomfield and Kingswood Parish Council and Sutton Valence Parish Council for increases from nine councillors to eleven councillors be refused.
1.3 Reasons for Recommendation
1.3.1 The LGPIH Act 2007 provides the Council with the power to take decisions in relation to the electoral arrangements of parishes. Since February 2008 the Council has had responsibility for undertaking community governance reviews and considering the electoral arrangements of an existing or proposed parish. Consideration of the electoral arrangements includes:
a) The ordinary year of election;
b) The number of councillors to be elected; and
c) The need to divide a parish into wards.
1.3.2 Two parish councils, Broomfield and Kingswood Parish Council and Sutton Valence Parish Council, have requested that the Council consider increasing the number of councillors on their respective councils from nine to eleven.
1.3.3 In submitting their
requests the parish councils have provided the following commentaries for the
Council to consider:
Broomfield and Kingswood Parish Council
Parish Councillors feel that the workload
(listed below) is ever increasing and as volunteers, most of whom in full time
occupations, it would be beneficial to spread the load and to ensure that
quorums are achievable.
·
Preparation
of a Neighbourhood Plan for the past 2.5 years creating copious correspondence
and meetings with both the residents, the consultants and Maidstone Borough
Council. Still ongoing;
·
Correspondence
and meetings with KCC re Road signs;
·
Correspondence
and meetings with MBC re local cleaning issues;
·
Correspondence
and meetings with KCC re Salt bins;
·
Correspondence
and meetings with both Orbit and MBC re the mismanagement of affordable
housing;
·
Correspondence
Liaising with Village Hall and meetings with both Orbit and Police re
Anti-social issues;
·
Dealing
with Planning applications;
·
Meetings
with residents re: illegal occupations;
·
Running
the Parish Website;
·
Attending
Finance and General Purpose Meetings;
·
Attending
various joint parish group meetings re general issues affecting all
Parishes;
·
Dealing
with issues relating to Sports field and safety;
· Looking after issues arising during staff holidays.
Sutton Valence Parish Council
The work load of a Parish Council has increased significantly in the past few years. Sutton Valence Parish Council in particular is an active Council with two allotment sites, two play areas, football pitches, toilet and areas of open space which it is responsible for. More Councillors would spread the load.
1.4 Considerations
1.4.1 The Local Government Boundaries Commission for England (LGBCE), the National Association of Local Councils and the Government all suggest that consideration should be given to the fact that the conduct of parish council business does not usually require a large body of councillors and local councils can find it difficult to attract appropriate numbers and appropriate quality candidates. They also suggest that consideration should be given to any unique local factors.
1.4.2 Appendix A to this report details the three most recent election results in each parish showing a high level of uncontested election. It also provides a map of the parish boundaries evidencing the size and character of the areas covered by the parish councils concerned.
1.4.3 The LGBCE has suggested the number of parish councillors should be commensurate with electorate size. The Council has previously considered the issue of size of a parish council (the number of parish councillors to be elected) and has adopted a scale for determining the ratio between electors and the number of parish councillors. The scale is set out below:
|
Up to 250 electors |
5 Councillors |
|
251-700 electors |
7 Councillors |
|
701-1350 electors |
9 Councillors |
|
1351-2200 electors |
11 Councillors |
|
2201-3250 electors |
13 Councillors |
|
3251-4500 electors |
15 Councillors |
|
Over 4500 electors |
At the discretion of the Council |
1.4.4 The range of sizes identified across the country by the LGBCE would suggest that the Councils scale is within suitable limits.
1.4.5 Broomfield and Kingswood Parish Council has 1,250 electors and Sutton Valence has 1,083 electors. Comparison of both parishes with the adopted scale suggests that both parish councils currently have the appropriate number of councillors, which is nine each.
1.4.6 Should the General Purposes Group or Council still wish to consider the requests favourably this would lead to the need for a community governance review and consultation under s82 of the LGPIH Act 2007. The terms of reference of such a review are set out in draft for each Parish Council in Appendix B and Appendix C. If changes arise from the reviews it would be necessary to incorporate the changes before the election in May 2015 and for that reason it would be essential that any such review commenced in December 2014.
1.4.7 In relation to the commentary from the parish councils it is clear that the parishes firmly believe that the workload of the individual councillors is a significant burden however the duties are standard duties expected of parish councils and the scale has been set by Council after consideration of those duties.
1.4.8 The officer recommendation to General Purposes Group is that it recommends to Council that the requests be declined on the basis that they are outside of the adopted scale.
1.5 Alternative Action and why not Recommended
1.5.1 The group could chose to recommend the Council complete the necessary community governance review that would be required to increase the number of parish councillors in each parish. This is contrary to the adopted scale and would require a formal justification to be presented to Council along with the recommendation.
1.6 Impact on Corporate Objectives
1.6.1 The decision does not directly impact on corporate objectives.
1.7
Risk
Management
1.7.1 The parish councils perceive that there is a risk that the current committee cannot service the needs of the parish however the current electorate levels suggest that they both meet the standards set by national organisations.
1.8
Other
Implications
|
1. Financial
|
|
|
2. Staffing
|
|
|
3. Legal
|
|
|
4. Equality Impact Needs Assessment
|
|
|
5. Environmental/Sustainable Development
|
|
|
6. Community Safety
|
|
|
7. Human Rights Act
|
|
|
8. Procurement
|
|
|
9. Asset Management
|
|
1.9 Relevant Documents
1.9.1 Appendices
Appendix A Terms of Reference Broomfield & Kingswood Parish Council
Appendix B Terms of Reference Sutton Valence Parish Council
Appendix C Last three years election history and Parish Boundary Maps
1.9.2 Background
Documents
None
|
IS THIS A KEY DECISION REPORT? THIS BOX MUST BE COMPLETED
Yes No
If yes, this is a Key Decision because: ..
.
Wards/Parishes affected: ..
..
|
||||||||||||
