Parish councils submissions to the Council electoral review

This PDF document contains 5 submissions from Parish councils.

Some versions of Adobe allow the viewer to move quickly between bookmarks.

Click on the submission you would like to view. If you are not taken to that page, please scroll through the document.

Local Government Boundary Commission for Consultation Portal Page 1 of 2

Lichfield District

Personal Details:

Name: PHILIP MILLARD

E-mail:

Postcode: Parish Organisation Name: Council

1: Line to bring back this area back in to the Bourne Vale Ward

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2013.

Map Features:

1: Line to bring back this area back in to the Bourne Vale Ward

Comment text: The Drayton Basett Parish was split across two Wards which has not helped with communication or our work as a Parish Council as it meant we had to deal with two separate District councillors. Both councillors covered very different wards and it proved difficult to get common ground on some key issues we were trying to action. The identity of Drayton Bassett Village needs to be kept separate from Town. The resident in Mayfair Drive, Mill Lane and Coleshill Road would like to remain in the Drayton Bassett parish and the Bourne Vale ward and to that end the parish ward should come back under Bourne Vale and the boundary extended.

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2703 30/12/2013 Cooper, Mark

From: Egan, Helen Sent: 25 February 2014 16:06 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: lichfield consultation

Hi Mark,

Please see below a submission regarding the Lichfield review.

Regards, Helen

From: clerk [mailto:clerk@.staffslc.gov.uk] Sent: 24 February 2014 20:03 To: Reviews@ Subject: lichfield consultation

The Parish Council discussed the matter of boundary changes and below is an extract of the minutes from 18 Feb which gives the PC's views on the matter:

Cllr Bayliss detailed the current situation and proposed changes: ie LDC is represented by 56 Cllrs equivalent to 1 representative for 1428 electors (Hammerwich has 1444 electors) The proposed reduction would see representation become 1 Cllr for 1702 electors Cllr Bayliss suggested that representations should be made to the Boundary Commission on the basis that Pool Ward comes back to Hammerwich District which would make representation 1 Cllr for 1612 electors and would also mean that the parish and district boundaries become one

Regards

Viv Evans Parish Clerk

1 Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 03 March 2014 08:32 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Electoral Review of Lichfield Attachments: electoral review.docx

From: Ian Van Arkadie Sent: 02 March 2014 15:30 To: Reviews@ Cc: Peter Timmis Subject: Electoral Review of Lichfield

Dear Mr Cooper Parish Council considered this review at its meeting on 27 February. The Parish Council wishes to comment to the effect that it wants the current parish boundary between Harlaston and neighbouring parishes to remain unchanged. A formal letter on a Parish Council letterhead confirming this is attached. Yours sincerely, Ian Van Arkadie Clerk to Harlaston Parish Council

1 HARLASTON PARISH COUNCIL Chairman of the Parish Council: Clerk to the Parish Council: Cllr P R Timmis Mr I Van Arkadie Manor Farm 17 Rowley Close Manor Lane Tamworth Harlaston B79 9LN Tamworth B79 9JS

Review Officer (Lichfield) Local Government Boundary Commission for England Layden House 76-86 Turnmill Street London EC1M 5LG

2 March 2014

Dear Mr Cooper,

Electoral Review of Lichfield

Harlaston Parish Council has considered the consultation on the above review.

The Parish Council wishes it to known that it hopes the current parish boundary between Harlaston and its neighbouring parishes will stay the same and not be changed as a result of this review.

I hope this all in order. Please ensure that the Parish Council’s views are made known in the decision making process.

Yours Sincerely,

Ian Van Arkadie Clerk to Harlaston Parish Council Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 03 March 2014 08:32 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Proposal from Shenstone Parish Council to Boundary Commission for England Electoral Review of Lichfield - responses to be received by 3rd March 2014 Attachments: DOC020314-02032014144132.pdf

Importance: High

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: admin@shenstone‐staffs.gov.uk [mailto:admin@shenstone‐staffs.gov.uk] Sent: 02 March 2014 14:27 To: Reviews@ Subject: Proposal from Shenstone Parish Council to Boundary Commission for England Electoral Review of Lichfield ‐ responses to be received by 3rd March 2014 Importance: High

2nd March 2014 REF: BCProposal/Response Shenstone Parish Council

For the attention of the Review Officer (Lichfield) Local Government Boundary Commission from Shenstone Parish Council in respect of Wards situated in Shenstone Parish Council which are located within Council boundaries.

Could you please confirm safe receipt of this correspondence at your offices.

Sue Nelson ‐ Parish Clerk Shenstone Parish Council Office 25C Main Street SHENSTONE WS14 OLZ

Tel: 101543 48 947 e‐mail: admin@shenstone‐staffs.gov.uk

1

Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal

Lichfield District

Personal Details:

Name: Margaret Jones

E-mail: [email protected]

Postcode: B78 3YB Wigginton and Parish Organisation Name: Council

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2013.

Map Features:

Comment text: Parish Council wishes to remain entirely within one ward. We do not wish our parish to be divided between two District Councillors, so that Wigginton and stay in Mease and Tame while Hopwas is placed in the same ward as Whittington. The parish will not be represented effectively if split between two Councillors, as there will be a duplication of correspondence whenever we need to refer matters to our District Councillor for advice and for action to be undertaken. We therefore request that the whole of this parish remains within the Mease and Tame ward, and that historic links are maintained.

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2927[19/02/2014 10:40:59]