DOCSLIB.ORG

How Local Authorities in West Sussex Could Be Affected by Council Tax Referendum Principles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
How Local Authorities in West Sussex Could Be Affected by Council Tax Referendum Principles How Local Authorities in West Sussex could be affected by Council Tax Referendum Principles Andy Beams, October 2018 Page 1 of 43 Contents List of tables, maps and figures page 4 1.0 Summary page 6 2.0 Council Tax Referendum Principles page 7 2.1 Background to Referendum Principles page 7 2.2 Council Tax Referendum Principles for Town and Parish Councils page 7 2.3 2017/18 Proposals page 8 2.4 2018/19 Proposals page 10 2.5 2019/20 Proposals page 10 2.6 Referendums held to date page 11 3.0 Parish Council Tax page 12 3.1 England page 12 3.2 West Sussex page 12 3.3 Adur District page 17 3.3.1 Precept page 17 3.3.2 Tax Base page 17 3.3.3 Band D page 18 3.4 Arun District page 19 3.4.1 Precept page 19 3.4.2 Tax Base page 20 3.4.3 Band D page 21 3.5 Chichester District page 23 3.5.1 Precept page 23 3.5.2 Tax Base page 24 3.5.3 Band D page 25 3.6 Horsham District page 27 3.6.1 Precept page 27 3.6.2 Tax Base page 28 3.6.3 Band D page 29 3.7 Mid Sussex District page 30 3.7.1 Precept page 30 3.7.2 Tax Base page 31 3.7.3 Band D page 32 Page 2 of 43 4.0 Effect of Referendum Principles on Town and Parish Councils page 34 4.1 2017/18 Proposals page 34 4.2 2018/19 Proposals page 34 4.3 Extension of Referendum Principles to all Local Precepting Authorities page 35 4.4 Future Proposals page 36 5.0 Conclusion page 37 Appendix 1: Parish Council data for Adur District 2014/15 to 2018/19 page 38 Appendix 2: Parish Council data for Arun District 2014/15 to 2018/19 page 38 Appendix 3: Parish Council data for Chichester District 2014/18 to 2018/19 page 39 Appendix 4: Parish Council data for Horsham District 2014/18 to 2018/19 page 41 Appendix 3: Parish Council data for Mid Sussex District 2014/18 to 2018/19 page 42 Page 3 of 43 List of Tables, Maps and Figures Table 1: Average percentage increase in parish Band D in England page 8 Table 2: Parish council tax in England 2014/15 to 2018/19 page 12 Table 3: Town and Parish Councils and Parish Meetings in West Sussex page 13 Table 4: Parish council tax summary page 13 Table 5: Parishes in West Sussex affected by extension of referendum principles page 35 Map 1: Borough and District Councils in West Sussex page 12 Figure 1: 2018/19 parish precepts split by District page 14 Figure 2: 2018/19 parish tax base split by District page 14 Figure 3: Average parish Band D 2018/19 by District compared to England average page 15 Figure 4: Average parish Band D changes by District 2014/15 to 2018/19 compared to England average page 15 Figure 5: Annual parish Band D changes by District 2014/15 to 2018/19 compared to England average page 16 Figure 6: 2018/19 parish precepts within Adur District page 17 Figure 7: 2018/19 parish tax base within Adur District page 17 Figure 8: Tax base changes 2014/15 to 2018/19 within Adur District page 18 Figure 9: 2018/19 parish Band D within Adur District compared to England average page 18 Figure 10: Band D changes 2014/15 to 2018/19 within Adur District compared to England average page 19 Figure 11: 2018/19 parish precepts within Arun District page 20 Figure 12: 2018/19 parish tax base within Arun District page 20 Figure 13: Tax base changes 2014/15 to 2018/19 within Arun District page 21 Figure 14: 2018/19 parish Band D within Arun District compared to England average page 22 Page 4 of 43 Figure 15: Band D changes 2014/15 to 2018/19 within Arun District compared to England average page 22 Figure 16: 2018/19 parish precepts within Chichester District page 23 Figure 17: 2018/19 parish tax base within Chichester District page 24 Figure 18: Tax base changes 2014/15 to 2018/19 within Chichester District page 25 Figure 19: 2018/19 parish Band D within Chichester District compared to England average page 26 Figure 20: Band D changes 2014/15 to 2018/19 within Chichester District compared to England average page 26 Figure 21: 2018/19 parish precepts within Horsham District page 27 Figure 22: 2018/19 parish tax base within Horsham District page 28 Figure 23: Tax base changes 2014/15 to 2018/19 within Horsham District page 29 Figure 24: 2018/19 parish Band D within Horsham District compared to England average page 29 Figure 25: Band D changes 2014/15 to 2018/19 within Horsham District compared to England average page 30 Figure 26: 2018/19 parish precepts within Mid Sussex District page 31 Figure 27: 2018/19 parish tax base within Mid Sussex District page 31 Figure 28: Tax base changes 2014/15 to 2018/19 within Mid Sussex District page 32 Figure 29: 2018/19 parish Band D within Mid Sussex District compared to England average page 33 Figure 30: Band D changes 2014/15 to 2018/19 within Mid Sussex District compared to England average page 33 Page 5 of 43 1.0 Summary This report reviews the potential impact of the introduction of council tax referendum principles for town and parish councils in West Sussex. The report provides the background relating to the position of the Government to date on council tax referendums, summarises the national and local position regarding parish council tax over a five year period and analyses the impact if referendum principles had been introduced for town and parish councils as initially proposed for the 2017-18 council tax year. The report includes all town councils, parish councils and parish meetings (where a precept is raised) in West Sussex, but excludes any parish which does not raise a precept. Parish Meetings are annotated with ‘PM’ after the location name. Some of the town and parish councils and parish meetings included in the report may not be members of the local county association. The report is purely analytical and makes no assumptions about whether the levels of council tax set by town and parish councils are reasonable, as no investigation into the reasons for any increases have been investigated. All of the data relating to town and parish precepts is taken from the Council Tax Statistics for Town and Parish Councils in England1 reports for the appropriate year, as published by the Department for Communities and Local Government (2014/15 – 2017/18) and subsequently the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. 1 Council Tax Statistics for Town and Parish Councils in England http://www.gov.uk/government/collections/council-tax-statistics Page 6 of 43 2.0 Council Tax Referendum Principles 2.1 Background In 2012/13 the Government introduced council tax referendum principles, via the Localism Act 20112. The powers apply to England only, and are intended to: • Ensure that excessive council tax increases occur only where they have a clear mandate from local people; and • Abolish central government capping powers The Act sets a duty on billing authorities, major precepting authorities and local precepting authorities (parish and town councils) to determine whether their relevant basic amount of council tax for a financial year is ‘excessive’. A set of principles determined by the Secretary of State is used to decide whether an authority’s council tax level is excessive. The Secretary of State may set one or more principles, but they must include a comparison between council tax levels for the year under consideration and the previous year. The Secretary of State may determine principles for particular categories of authority. The principles must be specified in a report to be laid before the House of Commons before the date on which the local government finance report for the year is approved by resolution of the House. A local referendum must be held, and won, for an authority to increase council tax by more than the amount specified in the principles. An authority proposing to set an excessive council tax level is required to make substitute calculations which will take effect if the proposed ‘excessive’ amount of council tax is rejected in a referendum. The substitute council tax level must be below the amount which is considered excessive under the principles. 2.2 Council Tax Referendum Principles for Town and Parish Councils Since the introduction of council tax referendum principles in 2012/13, up to 2016/17 there were no principles set for town and parish councils. However, this changed the following year when the first proposals for the sector were put forward. 2 Localism Act 2011 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/20/contents/enacted Page 7 of 43 2.3 2017/18 Proposals When the Department for Communities and Local Government published the 2017/18 Local Government Finance Settlement Technical Consultation3 paper in September 2016, it contained proposals to: introduce referendum principles for town and parish councils whose Band D precept is higher than that of the lowest charging district council for 2016/17 (£75.46), and which have a total precept for 2016/17 of at least £500,000, while taking into account transfers of responsibilities, and that consideration is given to the extension of referendums to all local precepting authorities.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Trotton with Chithurst Parish Council to the LGCBE Draft Recommendations for Chichester District
    “Steps”, Trotton, Nr Petersfield, West Sussex, GU31 5JS Response by Trotton with Chithurst Parish Council to the LGCBE Draft Recommendations for Chichester District Trotton with Chithurst Parish Council considered the draft recommendations at a meeting held on Wednesday 14th. September 2016. We are delighted that the proposal to move Trotton from Harting ward was rejected. However, we continue to have grave concerns regarding the proposal to move Elsted and Treyford Parish from Harting ward to Midhurst ward. Our response to the initial consultation included four points relating directly to Elsted parish, and we would repeat and strengthen these here: 1. Trotton no longer has a school, shop, village green, sports ground, village hall or public house and must rely on its neighbours' facilities. Our population centre (albeit a small one) is situated to the south of our parish, about a mile from the public house at Lower Elsted, which hosts events for Trotton residents each month. The Village hall and sports ground at Elsted give a good view across Trotton and are often used by Trotton residents. Trotton and Elsted Parishes are similar in size and nature and the two Parish councils have recently been exploring options for closer working, including the potential for a Common Parish Council. We have strong links to Elsted, which in turn has strong links with Harting Parish. 2. Like our neighbours in Elsted parish, Trotton also has strong links to its larger neighbour Rogate as the two parishes share a Rector across the four churches which make up the United Benefice. Given the small size and sparse facilities of our parish, we also value our links with Rogate for its school and for allowing us to combine with them for celebrations such as the recent Queen’s birthday.
    [Show full text]
  • Sunday 8Th March 2020 Second Sunday of Lent
    SUNDAY 8TH MARCH 2020 SECOND SUNDAY OF LENT 8.00 HOLY COMMUNION Service begins on page 236 of the Prayer Book. Collect and readings for the Second Sunday in Lent are on pp 88-89. 10.00 MATTINS Archer - Benedicte Responses: Radcliffe Farrant - Hide not thou thy face from us, O Lord Job 38: 1-7 Hebrews 4: 12 - end Psalm: 74: 13 - end Hymn: 415 (t. 346) Preacher: The Reverend Canon Tim Schofield, Precentor At the end of the service: The Lent Prose 11.00 SUNG EUCHARIST For full details of this Service please refer to the separate Order of Service. After the Sung Eucharist this morning, refreshments will be served in the South Transept, to which all members of the congregation are warmly invited. 3.30 EVENSONG Stanford in G Responses: Radcliffe Blow - Salvator mundi Numbers 21: 4-9 Luke 14: 27-33 Psalm: 135 Hymns: 357, 76 Organ Voluntary: Psalm Prelude Set 1 No. 1 by Herbert Howells (1892 - 1983) Notices Today Deacon Ish is preaching and leading the music worship at an all age family service at Bagley Baptist Church, in Somerset. Easter Flowers: The Cathedral flower arrangers would be most grateful for donations to help defray the costs of the Easter displays this year. Equally, if you would like to make a donation of £5 for a lily in memory of a loved one, please submit the details of the person to be remembered along with your donation. Names must be clearly written. All cheques should be made payable to ‘Chichester Cathedral Flower Fund’ and left in Reception.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ramblers' Association
    Portsmouth Group Spring - Summer (March – June 2016) Walks Programme The Ramblers' Association Working for Walkers The RA promotes rambling, protects Rights of Way, campaigns for access to open country and defends the beauty of the countryside Web site: Head office www.ramblers.org.uk Local http://www.portsmouthramblers.org.uk/ E-mail Email: Head office [email protected] Local [email protected] PORTSMOUTH GROUP WALKING PROGRAMME Correct as at 1st February 2016 The Portsmouth Group offers a variety of walks mainly in Hampshire, West Sussex and the Isle of Wight. On Saturdays these are moderately paced 5 to 9 mile walks whilst, on Sundays, they are faster paced 11 to 15 mile walks. The Group also has short Friday evening walks and some extra Saturday walks in more distant parts in the summer months. Most walks have a pub/cafe stop either at the end or at lunch time. INFORMATION FOR WALKERS New walkers always welcome. Just turn up at meeting place for shorter walks. For walks in excess of 10 miles, please contact leader first if you have not previously walked this distance. Grade A walks – for experienced walkers; brisk pace Grade B walks – regular pace Grade C walks – moderate pace Grade D walks – slow pace These are only general indications of the pace and will vary with the individual. All walks are circular unless otherwise stated. Wear stout footwear and carry waterproof clothing for possible wet weather. There will be stops for coffee and lunch, so please bring a flask and food. Walkers should not eat their own food in pubs/pub gardens without permission from the landlord.
    [Show full text]
  • Elsted and Treyford Parish Council Met Again on 22Nd September to Consider Additional Information Regarding the Boundary Review for Chichester
    Electoral Review of Chichester District To whom in concerns:- Elsted and Treyford Parish Council met again on 22nd September to consider additional information regarding the Boundary Review for Chichester. As a result it wishes to reiterate all the comments contained in the e-mail response to the Commission dated 1st September. The Commission should note that all the adjoining Parishes including Midhurst Town Council and Chichester District Council have objected to the proposed changes and the vast majority of residents support the Parish Councils view to include E&T Parish within the enlarged Harting ward. It would appear that the reason that you haven’t recommended the inclusion of E&T parish in the proposed Harting ward seems to be because if done the variance in the ward electorate would be high It is about 1% larger in terms of the electorate than the preferred upper limit – in the case of Harting ward that is 30 or so too many voters The inclusion of E&T into Midhurst ward would reduce the variable on Harting ward to + 3%, and increase the variable on Midhurst ward to + 8%. Plus 8% is the greatest variable of any ward according to the LGBCE draft proposals. It wouldn’t take much for an increase in the relatively low housing rate of build currently proposed for Midhurst and the parishes within the draft ward that adjoin it to push that figure higher, perhaps more than 2% higher. If that is the case the issue of Harting ward being too large, which nobody hereabouts objects to, could be swapped for a similar one at Midhurst that could cause unknown outcomes.
    [Show full text]
  • Elsted and Treyford, and Harting – Request for Diversion of Parts of Footpaths (Fp) 871, 872 and 873; Creation of New Footpath on Disused Railway
    Agenda Item No. 5 (b) Rights Of Way Committee 12 June 2018 Highways Act 1980 Sections 119 and 25 Elsted and Treyford, and Harting – Request for Diversion of Parts of Footpaths (fp) 871, 872 and 873; Creation of New Footpath on Disused Railway Report by Director for Highways and Transport Executive Summary In December 2017 Orders were made to divert three public footpaths, together with the dedication of two additional paths, at Woodhouse Farm near Elsted following an officer delegated decision by the Principal Rights of Way Officer. A copy of the Decision Report is attached for information (Appendix 1). The Orders attracted two objections and so, in line with the agreed practice when an Order made following officer delegated decision is opposed, the Committee is asked to decide whether the Orders should be submitted for confirmation. This report summarises the points raised by objectors and considers their significance in the context of the legal tests for Public Path Diversion Orders. Conclusion Having reviewed the objections with the applicants’ agent, the officers’ view remains that the legal tests for making and confirmation are met. To enable the Diversion Orders to be progressed they will need to be submitted to the Secretary of State (The Planning Inspectorate) for determination and the Committee’s authority to make the submission is now sought. Recommendation That the Public Path Diversion Orders made in respect of footpaths 871, 872 and 873 in the parishes of Elsted and Treyford and Harting be submitted by the Director of Law and Assurance to the Secretary of State for confirmation.
    [Show full text]
  • INFRASTRUCTURE BUSINESS PLAN - Appendices SOUTH DOWNS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY
    Agenda Item 10 Report PC20/21-18 Appendix 3 INFRASTRUCTURE BUSINESS PLAN - Appendices SOUTH DOWNS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY October 2020 123 Agenda Item 10 Report PC20/21-18 Appendix 3 APPENDIX A: TOTAL CIL RECEIPTS PASSED ONTO PARISH / TOWN COUNCILS (REGULATION 121B) Total paid to Parish / Town Total spent by Parish / Town Council from April 2017 to Parish / Town (where CIL liable development has 31st March 2020 Council up until Notes commenced) end of 2019 / 20 Currently unspent financial year Aldingbourne Parish Council £532.50 Alfriston Parish Council £188.34 Bepton Parish Council £396.00 £1,125.00 Works to War Memorial and Village Gate Bramdean and Hinton Ampner Parish Council £21,572.15 Buriton Parish Council £20,094.16 Clapham Parish Council £24,679.26 £600.00 Purchased a defibrillator Coldwaltham Parish Council £300.60 Compton Parish Council £1,089.09 Corhampton and Meonstoke Parish Council £1,332.80 Ditchling Parish Council £17,904.00 Droxford Parish Council £4,798.24 £4,055.00 A new timber play fort has been provided. Easebourne Parish Council £2,450.85 East Chiltington Parish Council £771.90 East Dean and Friston Parish Council £3,125.23 East Meon Parish Council £1,683.12 £1,433.88 Playground equipment improvements. Falmer Parish Council £157.84 Fernhurst Parish Council £2,096.34 Froxfield & Privett Parish Council £3,631.20 Fulking Parish Council £1,690.00 Funtington Parish Council £30,831.32 Greatham Parish Council £8,229.00 INFRASTRUCTURE BUSINESS PLAN - APPENDICES PAGE 2 124 Agenda Item 10 Report PC20/21-18 Appendix 3 Total paid to Parish / Town Total spent by Parish / Town Council from April 2017 to Parish / Town (where CIL liable development has 31st March 2020 Council up until Notes commenced) end of 2019 / 20 Currently unspent financial year Hambledon Parish Council £304.00 Hassocks Parish Council £2,954.33 Hawkley Parish Council £0.00 £958.09 Play equipment and re-surfacing works.
    [Show full text]
  • Roadworks Report Date Report Generated: for Period: Road Parish
    Roadworks Report Date Report Generated: For Period: Road Parish Henfield Road Albourne Hook Lane Aldingbourne Lidsey Road Aldingbourne Park Lane Aldingbourne Aldwick Street Aldwick Fish Lane Aldwick Fish Lane Aldwick Rose Green Road Aldwick Turnpike Road Amberley Angmering Bypass Angmering Littlehampton Road Eastbound Angmering Roundstone Lane Angmering Bolney Road Ansty And Staplefield Burgess Hill Road Ansty And Staplefield Cuckfield Road Ansty And Staplefield Cuckfield Road Ansty And Staplefield Deaks Lane Ansty And Staplefield Rocky Lane Ansty And Staplefield Rocky Lane Ansty And Staplefield Valebridge Road Ansty And Staplefield Appledram Lane South Appledram College Road Ardingly High Street Ardingly Lindfield Road Ardingly Chichester Road Bersted Rowan Way Bersted Billingshurst Bypass Billingshurst Billingshurst Bypass Roundabout Billingshurst Daux Avenue Billingshurst Lower Station Road Billingshurst Natts Lane Billingshurst Natts Lane Billingshurst Hawthorn Road Bognor Regis Shripney Road Southbound Bognor Regis William Street Bognor Regis York Road Bognor Regis A285 Redvins Road To Tinwood Lane Boxgrove Crouch Cross Lane Boxgrove The Street Boxgrove Castle Lane Bramber De Braose Way Bramber Steyning Bypass Bramber Farthings Hill Roundabout Broadbridge Heath Old Guildford Road Broadbridge Heath Folders Lane Burgess Hill Keymer Road Burgess Hill Kings Way Burgess Hill Orchard Road Burgess Hill Royal George Road Burgess Hill St Johns Road Burgess Hill A27 Chichester Bypass Eastbound Chichester Broyle Road Chichester Fishbourne Road
    [Show full text]
  • Public Rights of Way Inspection Areas
    Worth Crawley East Grinstead Rusper Ashurst Wood Turners Hill Warnham North Horsham Rudgwick Colgate West Hoathly Slinfold Linchmere Plaistow Slaugham Loxwood Broadbridge HeathHorsham Balcombe Northchapel Ardingly Linch Lurgashall Itchingfield Horsted Keynes Fernhurst Lower Beeding Milland Southwater Ebernoe Nuthurst Kirdford Ansty and Staplefield Billingshurst Rogate Wisborough Green Lindfield Cuckfield Woolbeding with Redford Lodsworth Haywards Heath Lindfield Rural Bolney Trotton with Chithurst Easebourne Shipley Tillington Cowfold Stedham with Iping Petworth Midhurst West Lavington Fittleworth Pulborough West Chiltington West Grinstead Twineham Harting Stopham Shermanbury Elsted and Treyford Burgess Hill Heyshott Bepton Thakeham Hurstpierpoint and Sayers Common East LavingtonDuncton Cocking Coldwaltham Graffham Barlavington Ashington Ashurst Albourne Henfield Hassocks Woodmancote Bury Marden Sutton Parham Wiston 1 - Katherine Eels Compton Bignor Singleton Storrington and Sullington West Dean Upwaltham East Dean Washington 2 - Katrina Harper Amberley Steyning Poynings Pyecombe Newtimber Houghton Fulking Upper Beeding Stoughton Madehurst 3 - Darryl Hobden (until 1/3/17) Slindon Burpham Bramber South Stoke Findon Lavant Boxgrove Eartham Funtington Westhampnett Patching 4 - Vacant Westbourne Coombes Arundel Warningcamp Clapham Sompting Shoreham/Southwick Tangmere Walberton Lyminster and Crossbush Southbourne 5 - Nigel Bird Chichester AldingbourneEastergate Poling Angmering Lancing Fishbourne Worthing Oving Chidham and Hambrook Ford Littlehampton
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Main Issues Raised by the Representations Made Pursuant to Regulation 18
    South Downs National Park Authority South Downs Local Plan: Preferred Options Consultation September-October 2015 Summary of main issues raised by the representations made pursuant to Regulation 18 February 2016 1 2 Contents Introduction 5 Summary of Responses: General Comments 10 Chapter 1 – Introduction 16 Chapter 2 – Spatial Portrait – The National Park Today 19 Chapter 3 – Vision and Objectives 21 Chapter 4 – Core Policies 23 Chapter 5 – A Thriving Living Landscape – Strategic Policies 49 Chapter 6 – People Connected with Places – Strategic Policies 95 Chapter 7 – Towards a Sustainable Future – Strategic Policies 112 Chapter 8 – Strategic Sites 142 Chapter 9 – Site Allocations 147 Chapter 10 – Development Management Policies 167 Chapter 11 – Implementation and Monitoring 209 Inset Maps 210 Appendices and Glossary 212 3 4 Introduction 1.1 The South Downs Local Plan: Preferred Options was published for public consultation under Regulation 18 of The Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012. The consultation was launched on 2 September and ran for 8 weeks until 28 October 2015. 1.2 Local Plan policies have been formulated in consultation with local communities, building on extensive engagement on the Partnership Management Plan (PMP) and the State of the Park Report. The views and input of the local community are vital to us and we have undertaken a considerable amount of public engagement, particularly with the town and parish councils. The Authority also benefits from the active engagement with a number of local groups including the South Downs Land Managers’ Group and the South Downs Partnership, who give us a wide range of views from people who live, work and develop in the National Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Chichester Diocesan Intercessions: January – March 2021
    Chichester Diocesan Intercessions: J a n u a r y – M a r c h 2 0 2 1 JANUARY 10 THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST The Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia 1 Naming and Circumcision of Jesus The Diocese of Aba – The Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion) PRAY for the Diocesan Safeguarding Team: , (Aba Province) Diocesan Safeguarding Adviser: Colin Perkins; Barbara Storer and GOSSOPS GREEN and BEWBUSH: Ann Alexander, I; Lizzie Green, Vicki Martin, Assistant Diocesan Safeguarding Advisers; Helen Asst.C. Irving, Independent Sexual Violence Adviser; Claire Coles, PCR2 THE HOLY TRINITY CE SECONDARY SCHOOL: Christine Millwood, Cases; Kim Nash and Micaela Mitchell, Administrators HT. 11 Mary Slessor, 1915 2 Basil the Great and Gregory of Nazianzus, Bishops, The Diocese of Afikpo – The Church of Nigeria Teachers of the Faith, 379 and 389; Seraphim, Monk of Sarov, (Anglican Communion) (Enugu Province) Spiritual Guide, 1833; Vedanayagam Samuel Azariah, Bishop in HORSHAM: Lisa Barnett, TR; David Bouskill, TV; Rebecca Tuck, South India, Evangelist, 1945 Asst.C; Karen Ind, Peter Scofield, and Margaret Symonds, Simon The Diocese of Aba Ngwa North – The Church of Nigeria (Anglican Quail; Graham Rumney Rdrs. Communion) (Aba Province) ST MARY’S CEP SCHOOL: Alex Bird, HT; Claire Swarbrick, Chr FURNACE GREEN: Richard Poole, I; Marilyn Appleby, Rdr 12 Aelred of Hexham, 1167; Benedict Biscop, 689 The Diocese of North Africa – The Episcopal / Anglican Province of Alexandria 3 THE EPIPHANY OF THE LORD (SECOND SUNDAY OF CHISTMAS) ITCHINGFIELD with SLINFOLD: Sandra Hall, I; Rosemary Cattell, O God, who revealed your only Son to the Gentiles by the leading Ass.P; Carol Shepherd, Rdr.
    [Show full text]
  • South Downs National Park Authority
    Unconfirmed minutes – to be confirmed at the next meeting of the Planning Committee SOUTH DOWNS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY PLANNING COMMITTEE 11 July 2011 Held at Cowdray Hall, Midhurst at 10:30am Present: Andrew Shaxson - Chair Barbara Holyome Neville Harrison Charles Peck Ken Bodfish Jennifer Gray Alun Alesbury David Jenkins Margaret Paren (ex officio) Tom Jones SDNPA Officers: Jim Redwood (Head of Planning) Pat Aird (Major Applications and Enforcement Lead), Michael Scammell (Historical Building Officer), David Townsend (Link Officer Chichester), Keith Reed (Local Development Framework (LDF) Lead), Claire Potts (Minerals and Waste Lead), Sam Dumbrell (WSCC) Becky Moutrey (Senior Solicitor) Rebecca Haynes (Member Services Officer). APOLOGIES 1. Apologies for absence were received from Minette Palmer, ELECTION OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIR AND DEPUTY CHAIR 2. Andrew Shaxson was the only nomination and duly elected as Chair and presided over the rest of the meeting. 3. Barbara Holyome joined the meeting at 10:34am 4. Neville Harrison was the only nomination and duly elected as Deputy Chair. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 5. Andrew Shaxson declared a personal non prejudicial interest in agenda Items 6, 7, 8 and 10 as a member of Chichester DC. He explained that he is no longer a member of their Development Control committee, but was when Items 6 and 7 were considered by that committee as a consultee on 20 April 2011. He declared a personal interest in them at that time as a member of the SDNPA planning committee, and left the committee table when they were debated and therefore took no part in the proceedings. Andrew Shaxson also declared a personal, non prejudicial interest in agenda items 6, 7 & 8 as a member of Elsted and Treyford Parish Council, who sent comments for consideration to Chichester District Council (CDC) as the then planning authority as a result of a debate on items 6 and 7 at a SDNPA meeting on 25 November 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • HERITAGE at RISK REGISTER 2009 / SOUTH EAST Contentscontents
    HERITAGE AT RISK REGISTER 2009 / SOUTH EAST ContentsContents HERITAGEHERITAGE AT RISK AT RISK 2 2 Buildings atBuildings Risk at Risk 6 6 MonumentsMonuments at Risk at Risk 8 8 Parks and GardensParks and at GardensRisk at Risk 10 11 Battlefields Battlefieldsat Risk and Shipwrecks at Risk12 12 ShipwrecksConservation at Risk Areas at Risk 13 14 ConservationThe Areas 2009 at CAARs Risk Survey 14 16 The 2009 ConservationPublications and Areas guidance Survey 16 20 PublicationsTHE and REGISTERguidance 2008 20 21 The register – content and 22 THE REGISTERassessment 2009 criteria 21 Contents Key to the entries 21 25 The registerHeritage – content at Riskand listings 22 26 assessment criteria Key to the entries 24 Heritage at Risk entries 26 HERITAGE AT RISK 2009 / SOUTH EAST HERITAGE AT RISK IN THE SOUTH EAST Registered Battlefields at Risk Listed Buildings at Risk Scheduled Monuments at Risk Registered Parks and Gardens at Risk Protected Wrecks at Risk Local Planning Authority 2 HERITAGE AT RISK 2009 / SOUTH EAST We are all justly proud of England’s historic buildings, monuments, parks, gardens and designed landscapes, battlefields and shipwrecks. But too many of them are suffering from neglect, decay and pressure from development. Heritage at Risk is a national project to identify these endangered places and then help secure their future. In 2008 English Heritage published its first register of Heritage at Risk – a region-by-region list of all the Grade I and II* listed buildings (and Grade II listed buildings in London), structural scheduled monuments, registered battlefields and protected wreck sites in England known to be ‘at risk’.
    [Show full text]