Quick viewing(Text Mode)

Review of Electoral Arrangements Draft Proposals

Review of Electoral Arrangements Draft Proposals

LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR

REVIEW OF ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS DRAFT PROPOSALS

COUNTY BOROUGH OF

LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR WALES

REVIEW OF ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE OF CONWY

DRAFT PROPOSALS

1. INTRODUCTION

2. SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS

3. SCOPE AND OBJECT OF THE REVIEW

4. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED PRIOR TO DRAFT PROPOSALS

5. ASSESSMENT

6. PROPOSALS

7. RESPONSES TO THIS REPORT

APPENDIX 1 GLOSSARY OF TERMS APPENDIX 2 EXISTING COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP APPENDIX 3 PROPOSED COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP APPENDIX 4 MINISTER’S DIRECTIONS AND ADDITIONAL LETTER APPENDIX 5 SUMMARY OF INITIAL REPRESENTATIONS

The Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales Caradog House 1-6 St Andrews Place CF10 3BE Tel Number: (029) 2039 5031 Fax Number: (029) 2039 5250 E-mail: [email protected] www.lgbc-wales.gov.uk FOREWORD

Those who have received this report containing our Draft Proposals will already be aware of this Review of Electoral Arrangements for all local authority areas in Wales.

An important principle for our work is to aim to achieve a better democratic balance within each council area so that each vote cast in an election is, so far as reasonably practicable, of the same weight as all others in the council area. The achievement of this aim, along with other measures, would be conducive to effective and convenient local government. At the beginning of this review process we have found some considerable differences between the numbers of voters to councillors not only between council areas in Wales, but also within council areas themselves.

The Commission is constrained by a number of things in the way we undertake our work:

 The basic “building blocks” for electoral divisions are the areas into which Wales is divided. These community areas were set up over 30 years ago and despite the work already done by some local authorities and also ourselves, there are still many places where the community areas do not reflect the present pattern of community life.

 The accuracy of the information on the numbers of residents in each council area in 5 years time challenges all – the future is difficult to predict. The Commission has therefore adopted a cautious approach in using these projections.

 The legal rules by which we operate are also quite strict and again place limitations on what we can do for each electoral division.

This report provides our initial recommendations on what has to be done within this council area. We wish to provide a better democratic balance together with electoral arrangements which contribute to there being effective and convenient local government wherever you live in Wales.

Paul Wood Chairman 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 We, the members of the Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales, have completed the first stage of the review of electoral arrangements for the County Borough of Conwy and present our Draft Proposals for the future electoral arrangements. A glossary of terms used in this report can be found at Appendix 1. The County Borough of Conwy currently has an electorate of 89,403. At present it is divided into 38 divisions (22 of which are single-member and 16 multi-member) returning 59 councillors. The overall ratio of members to electors for the County Borough is currently 1:1,515. The present electoral arrangements are set out in detail in Appendix 2.

2. SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS

2.1 We propose a change to the arrangement of electoral divisions that will achieve a significant improvement in the level of electoral parity across the County Borough of Conwy and results in a reduction in the council size from 59 to 57 elected members.

3. SCOPE AND OBJECT OF THE REVIEW

3.1 Section 57 of the Local Government Act 1972 (the 1972 Act) lays upon the Commission the duty, at intervals of not less than 10 and not more than fifteen years, to review the electoral arrangements for every principal area in Wales for the purpose of considering whether or not to make proposals to the Welsh Assembly Government for a change in those electoral arrangements.

3.2 The Minister for Social Justice and Local Government of the Welsh Assembly Government has directed the Commission to submit a report in respect of the review of electoral arrangements for the County Borough of Conwy by 30 June 2011.

Electoral Arrangements

3.3 The “electoral arrangements” of a principal area are defined in section 78 of the 1972 Act as:

i) the total number of councillors to be elected to the council;

ii) the number and boundaries of electoral divisions;

iii) the number of councillors to be elected for each electoral division; and

iv) the name of any electoral division.

- 1 - Rules to Be Observed Considering Electoral Arrangements

3.4 We are required by section 78 to comply, so far as is reasonably practicable, with the rules set out in Schedule 11 to the 1972 Act (as amended by the 1994 Act). These require the Commission to provide for there to be a single member for each electoral division. However, the Minister may direct the Commission to consider the desirability of providing for multi-member electoral divisions for the whole or part of a principal area.

3.5 The rules also require that:

Having regard to any change in the number or distribution of local government electors of the principal area likely to take place within the period of five years immediately following consideration of the electoral arrangements:

i) subject to paragraph (ii), the number of local government electors shall be, as nearly as may be, the same in every electoral division in the principal area;

ii) where there are one or more multi-member divisions, the ratio of the number of local government electors to the number of councillors to be elected shall be, as nearly as may be, the same in every electoral division in the principal area (including any that are not multi-member divisions);

iii) every ward of a community having a community council (whether separate or common) shall lie wholly within a single electoral division; and

iv) every community which is not divided into community wards shall lie wholly within a single electoral division.

In considering the electoral arrangements, we must have regard to (a) the desirability of fixing boundaries which are and will remain easily identifiable; and (b) any local ties which would be broken by the fixing of any particular boundary.

Minister’s Directions

3.6 The Minister has directed that the Commission shall consider the desirability of multi member electoral divisions in each county and county borough council in Wales.

3.7 The Minister has also given the following directions to the Commission for their guidance in conducting the review:

(a) it is considered that a minimum number of 30 councillors is required for the proper management of the affairs of a county or county borough council;

(b) it is considered that, in order to minimise the risk of a county council or a county borough council becoming unwieldy and difficult to manage, a maximum number of 75 councillors is ordinarily required for the proper management of the affairs of a county or a county borough council;

- 2 - (c) it is considered that the aim should be to achieve electoral divisions with a councillor to electorate ratio no lower than 1:1,750;

(d) it is considered that decisions to alter the existing pattern of multi and single member electoral divisions should only be taken where such proposals for alteration are broadly supported by the electorate in so far as their views can be obtained in fulfilment of the consultation requirement contained in Section 60 of the Act; and

(e) It is considered that the Commission shall, when conducting reviews under Part 4 of the Act, comply with paragraph 1A of Schedule 11 to the Act that is, the Rules.

The full text of the Directions is at Appendix 4. The Directions were further explained in a letter from the Minister on 12 May 2009. A copy of this letter follows the Directions at Appendix 4.

Local Government Changes

3.8 Since the last review of electoral arrangements there has been one change to local government boundaries in Conwy:

 2009 No. 2717 (W.229) The Conwy ( and Conwy) Order 2009.

This made changes to the boundary between the Communities of Conwy and Llandudno and made consequential changes to the boundaries of the Craig-y-Don, , Marl, , and electoral divisions.

Procedure

3.9 Section 60 of the 1972 Act lays down procedural guidelines which are to be followed in carrying out a review. In compliance with Section 60 of the 1972 Act we wrote on 28 September 2009 to Council, all the community councils in the area, the Members of Parliament for the local constituencies, the Assembly Members for the area and other interested parties to inform them of our intention to conduct the review and to request their preliminary views. We invited the County Borough Council to submit a suggested scheme or schemes for new electoral arrangements. We also publicised our intention to conduct the review in local newspapers circulating in the County Borough and asked Conwy County Borough Council to display a number of public notices in their area. We also made available copies of our electoral reviews guidance booklet. In addition we made a presentation to both City and Community councillors explaining the review process.

4. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED PRIOR TO DRAFT PROPOSALS

4.1 We received representations from Conwy County Borough Council, Councillor Andrew Hinchliff (Bryn electoral division), Councillor Jason Weyman (Deganwy electoral division), Councillor Dr Stuart Anderson ( electoral division),

- 3 - Councillor Ken A. Stevens (Pant yr Afon / Penmaenan electoral division), Bay of Town Council, Betws-y-Coed Community Council, Community Council, Llandudno Town Council, Town Council, Community Council, Town Council, Gareth Jones AM (Aberconwy) and a resident of Bodelwyddan (). We considered all of these representations carefully before we formulated our proposals. A summary of these representations can be found at Appendix 5.

5. ASSESSMENT

Request for Boundary Change

5.1 Before considering the electoral arrangements for the County Borough of Conwy, we would like to respond to the representation that asked us to undertake a review of the boundary of the County Borough. It is evident from this request that some uncertainty exists about the appropriate machinery for effecting such reviews. We wish to set out the statutory position.

5.2 This review of the future electoral arrangements for the County Borough of Conwy is being conducted under section 57(1) of the 1972 Act (as substituted by the 1994 Act). The definition of “electoral arrangements” in paragraph 78(1) of the 1972 Act (see paragraph 2.3) does not empower the Commission to make either substantive or consequential proposals for changes in local government areas (i.e. boundaries), in the context of this review.

5.3 The review of local government areas in Wales is provided for elsewhere. Under section 55(1) of the 1972 Act (as amended by the 1994 Act), we have a duty to keep under review all principal areas in Wales for the purpose of considering whether or not to make proposals to the Welsh Assembly Government for effecting changes appearing to us to be desirable in the interests of effective and convenient local government. We may also consider any request made to them by a local authority that we should make such proposals. However, we take the view that it would not be sensible or practical to conduct separate reviews of a local government area and its electoral arrangements concurrently. Accordingly, we do not propose to conduct any review of the area of the County Borough of Conwy until its future electoral arrangements are in place.

Request for a Community Boundary Change

5.4 We would also wish to respond to the representations that asked us to make changes to electoral division boundaries that are community or community ward boundaries. For such changes to take place it would first be necessary to undertake a review of community or community ward boundaries. The statutory position is that Section 55(2) of the 1972 Act (as amended by the 1994 Act) requires each principal council in Wales to keep the whole of their area under review for the purpose of considering whether to make recommendations to the Commission for the constitution of new communities, the abolition of communities or the alteration of communities in their area. The Commission then consider the principal council’s

- 4 - proposals and report to the Welsh Assembly Government which may, if it thinks fit, by order give effect to any of the proposals.

5.5 Under Section 57(4) of the 1972 Act (as amended by the 1994 Act), the principal councils also have a duty to keep under review the electoral arrangements (which include the community ward boundaries) for the communities within their areas, for the purpose of considering whether to make substantive changes. The principal councils must also consider requests for changes made by a community council or by not less than thirty local government electors of a community and, if they think fit, make an order giving effect to those changes.

5.6 Changes to the boundaries of communities and community wards are therefore a matter for the principal council to consider in the first instance and may not be considered by us as part of this review. We will use the community and community wards as they exist at the start of this review as the building blocks for the proposed electoral divisions.

Councillor to electorate ratio

5.7 The Minister's directions include the following at 3.7 (a): "It is considered that the aim should be to achieve electoral divisions with a councillor to electorate ratio no lower than 1:1,750.” The Minister has indicated to the Commission that this means that the number of electors per councillor should not normally fall below 1,750, and this is how the Commission has interpreted and applied the Direction. We bear very much in mind that the directions are provided as guidance and should not be applied without regard to the special circumstances of the particular area: there may well be circumstances, having to do with topography or population etc of the area where it will be considered that an electoral division of fewer than 1,750 electors to be represented by each councillor is appropriate. This was explained in the letter from the Minister (Appendix 4) which stated: “This means that the ratio remains as the aim to be worked towards and not as a goal to be achieved in each case. In doing so attention should be paid to local communities having their own identifiable representation even where the indicative figure of 1,750 electors/ councillor is not always achievable”. In the absence of special circumstances we will aim to propose electoral arrangements in which the level of representation does not fall below 1,750 electors per councillor. We are not constrained in the same way by this direction from proposing electoral arrangements in which the number of electors to be represented by each councillor is, in appropriate cases, higher than 1,750. Throughout this review we will keep the ratio of 1:1,750 very much in mind, and will not normally think it necessary to refer to it expressly in every case.

Council size

5.8 At present the size of the council at 59 members is within the numerical limits advised in the Minister’s directions (Appendix 4).) The current overall member to electorate ratio for the council is 1:1,515. We noted that there are currently 22 single-member and 16 multi-member electoral divisions. We also noted that, in respect of the number of electors per councillor in each electoral division there is a wide variation from the current county average of 1,515 electors per councillor ranging from 43% below () to 37% above (Pant-yr-afon/Penmaenan).

- 5 - 5.9 We reviewed the electoral arrangements for the County Borough of Conwy in the light of the Minister’s directions for our guidance and took account of the representations which had been made to us. In our deliberations we considered the ratio of local government electors to the number of councillors to be elected, with a view to proposing changes to ensure that the number of local government electors shall be, as nearly as may be, the same in every division in the principal area. We considered the size and character of the authority and a wide range of other factors including population density, the local topography, road communications and local ties.

5.10 For the reasons given below we believe that in the interests of effective and convenient local government a council size of 57 would be appropriate to represent the County Borough of Conwy. This determination of the council size results in an average of 1,568 electors being represented by each councillor.

Number of Electors

5.11 The numbers shown as the electorate for 2009 and the estimates for the electorate in the year 2014 are those submitted to us by Conwy County Borough Council. The forecast figures supplied by Conwy County Borough Council show a forecasted rise in the electorate of 4,837 from 89,403 to 94,240.

Electoral Divisions

5.12 We have considered the electoral arrangements of the existing electoral divisions of Betws yn Rhos, Bryn, , Colwyn, Conwy, Deganwy, Eirias, Gele, Glyn, Gogarth, Kinmel Bay, Llansanffraid, , Mochdre, Mostyn, Pandy, Penrhyn, Rhiw, , and Tudno and the ratio of local government electors to the number of councillors to be elected and we propose that the existing arrangements should continue. We considered changes to the remaining electoral divisions. Details of the current electoral arrangements can be found at Appendix 2.

5.13 We have noted that most of Conwy, in terms of land area, consists of sparsely populated upland areas. The communities along the coastal strip are mainly small in area but relatively high in numbers of electors and the larger communities (such as Llandudno and Conwy) are warded into smaller areas. In the interior the opposite is true as the communities cover much larger areas and have very small electorates. Whereas the electoral divisions along the coast are generally multi- member the rest of the county mainly has electoral divisions made up from collections of communities and are single-member. In general, under the existing arrangements, the more urban electoral divisions have a higher number of electors represented by each councillor than those of the rural inland areas.

5.14 We do not consider that this justifies the significant levels of representations that point to the difficulties experienced with large rural electoral divisions and the views expressed that such areas should be entitled to have a lower number of electors per councillor than the more compact urban areas. Whilst we may consider a degree of variation in electoral parity should specific circumstances appear to us to merit this, we do not consider that it is appropriate for the significant levels of

- 6 - variation that exist under the current arrangements in Conwy. We have therefore considered changes to the existing electoral arrangements that will achieve improvements in electoral parity, moving towards 1,750 electors per councillor and retaining, where possible, single member electoral divisions.

Bettws-y-Coed,

5.15 The Bettws-y-Coed electoral division consists of the Communities of Betws-y-Coed (443 electors, 443 projected), (184 electors, 184 projected) and (369 electors, 369 projected) with a total of 996 electors represented by one councillor which is 34% below the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 43% below 1,750 electors per councillor. These are sparsely populated upland communities with the largest centre of population being Betws-y- Coed in the Conwy Valley at the eastern edge of the electoral division.

5.16 In their representation Betws-y-Coed Community Council were of the view that in the consideration of the representation of rural communities factors such as distances and remoteness etc. should be taken account of. We are of the view however that even making allowances for rural sparcity, the current level of representation is not appropriate when compared to the county average. Consideration was therefore given to combining all or part of this electoral division with other areas in order to form electoral divisions with levels of representation closer to the county average. We therefore gave consideration to combining all or part of the Bettws-y-Coed electoral division with the adjoining Trefriw electoral division.

5.17 The Trefriw electoral division consists of the Communities of (325 electors, 325 projected) and Trefriw (672 electors, 672 projected) with a total of 997 electors represented by one councillor which is 34% below the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 43% below 1,750 electors per councillor. There is limited but adequate access between these two electoral divisions the main route being the B5106 that runs along the western side of the Conwy Valley. If these two electoral divisions were to be combined it would result in an electoral division of 1,993 electors which, if represented by one councillor, would be 32% above the existing county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and 14% above 1,750 electors per councillor. Although we noted that this would provide a level of representation that is closer to 1,750 electors than the current arrangements we also noted that the variation from the county average would be almost as high above the county average as it is currently below it. We do not therefore consider that this arrangement would be appropriate and have considered alternative arrangements.

5.18 We noted that the Community of Dolwyddelan in the Betws-y-Coed electoral division) is adjacent to The Community of which is in the electoral division and it appears to us that the topography and nature of the settlements within the two communities are similar in nature. This would suggest to us that it would be convenient for the Community of Dolwyddelan to be in the same electoral division as the Community of Bro Machno and we have proposed this at 5.21 below. This would then leave a combined Betws-y-Coed and Trefriw electoral division consisting of the Communities of Capel Curig, Betws-y-Coed, Dolgarrog

- 7 - and Trefriw. This would create an electoral division with 1,624 electors (1,624 projected) which, if represented by one councillor, would be 5% above the proposed county average of 1,541 electors per councillor and 7% below 1,750 electors per councillor. This option appears to us to provide a more appropriate level of representation than the existing arrangements. We put this scheme forward as a proposal. We have given the proposed electoral division a working name of Betws-y-Coed and Trefriw. We would welcome any suggestions for alternative names. This proposal would result in a reduction of one councillor representing the area but it will improve the electoral parity and, we consider, will result in a more convenient combination of communities than alternative schemes.

Llanrwst electoral divisions (Crwst and Gower)

5.19 The Gower electoral division consists of the Gower ward of the Community of Llanrwst with 868 electors represented by one councillor which is 43% below the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 50% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that it is not appropriate for such a large variation in the level of representation to exist between that of the Gower electoral division and the county average. We note that the adjoining Crwst electoral division, which consists of the Crwst ward of the Community of Llanrwst with 1,585 electors represented by one councillor, is 5% above the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 9% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that such a large variation in the levels of representation between electoral divisions that are formed from the two wards of the same community is not appropriate. We are of the view that it would be desirable to make changes to the electoral arrangements in this area in order to achieve improvements in electoral parity.

5.20 In their representation Llanrwst Town Council suggest that Llanrwst Town be considered as a single electoral division to be represented by two councillors. This suggested electoral division would have 2,453 electors which, if represented by two councillors, will result in a level of representation of 1,227 electors per councillor which is 19% below the present county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and 30% below 1,750 electors per councillor.

5.21 Although this suggested arrangement has the advantage of improving the overall level of electoral parity for the town of Llanrwst we were concerned that the level of representation for the suggested electoral division would still be significantly lower than the county average. We therefore considered combining the Community of Llanrwst with an adjoining community in order to achieve further improvements in electoral parity.

5.22 We noted that the adjoining electoral division, with 1,225 electors represented by one councillor, has a similar level of representation to that of the suggested Llanrwst electoral division. Part of the Eglwysbach electoral division is the Community of and (486 electors, 486 projected). This community adjoins Llanrwst to the north and the two are joined by the A470 trunk road and other minor roads.

5.23 Combining the Community of Llanrwst with the Community of would form an electoral division is formed with a total of 2,939 electors

- 8 - (2,956 projected) which, if represented by two councillors, will result in a level of representation of 1,470 electors per councillor which is 3% below the existing county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and 16% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that this arrangement significantly improves the level of electoral parity for the area. We put this scheme forward as a proposal. We have given the proposed electoral division a working name of Llanrwst. We would welcome any suggestions for alternative names.

Llangernyw

5.24 The Llangernyw electoral division consists of the Communities of Llangernyw (877 electors, 905 projected) and (292 electors, 292 projected) with a total of 1,169 electors represented by one councillor which is 23% below the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 33% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that it is not appropriate for such a large variation in the level of representation to exist between that of the Llangernyw electoral division and the county average. We therefore considered making changes to the electoral arrangements in this area.

5.25 We have noted that, despite being in the same electoral division, the Community of Pentrefoelas appears to us to have few, if any, community ties with the Community of Llangernyw as there are no direct road links across their common boundary. We consider that is likely that Pentrefoelas has closer ties with the adjoining Community of along the A5 trunk road. We also consider that the Community of Llangernyw has closer ties with the adjoining Community of Eglwysbach and that it would be appropriate for both of these two communities to be in the same electoral division. We therefore propose dissolving the Llangernyw electoral division, including the Community of Pentrefoelas within the Uwchaled electoral division (5.32 below) and including the Community of Llangernyw within the Eglwysbach and Llangernyw electoral division (5.27 below). Eglwysbach and Llangernyw electoral division under this proposal be will be 3% below the proposed county average of 1,568 electors represented by each councillor. This proposal would result in a reduction of one councillor representing the area but it will improve the electoral parity and, we consider, will result in a more appropriate combination of communities.

Eglwysbach

5.26 The Eglwysbach electoral division consists of the Communities of Eglwysbach (739 electors, 739 projected) and Llanddoged and Maenan (486 electors, 486 projected) with a total of 1,225 electors (1,225 projected) represented by one councillor which is 19% below the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 30% below 1,750 electors per councillor.

5.27 At 5.23 above we have proposed including the Community of Llanddoged and Maenan within a proposed Llanrwst electoral division and at 5.19 above we have proposed the dissolution of the existing Llangernyw electoral division. This would leave the adjoining Communities of Elglwysbach and Llangernyw to form a new electoral division with a total of 1,616 electors (1,644 projected) which, if represented by one councillor, would be 3% above the proposed county average of

- 9 - 1,568 electors per councillor and 8% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that this arrangement improves the level of electoral parity for the area and we put this scheme forward as a proposal. We have given the proposed electoral division a working name of Eglwysbach and Llangernyw. We would welcome any suggestions for alternative names.

Uwch Conwy

5.28 The Uwch Conwy electoral division consists of the Communities of Bro Machno (554 electors, 554 projected), (554 electors, 554 projected) and (166 electors, 166 projected) with a total of 1,274 electors represented by one councillor which is 16% below the existing county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 27% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that it is not appropriate for such a large variation in the level of representation to exist between that of the Uwch Conwy electoral division and the county average. We therefore considered making changes to the electoral arrangements in this area.

5.29 At 5.18 above we considered that it would be appropriate for the Community of Dolwyddelan (369 electors, 369 projected) to be in the same electoral division as the Community of Bro Machno. We noted that the Community of Ysbyty Ifan covers the area of the valley formed by the Afon Conwy to the south of A5 trunk road. The main access route to Ysbyty Ifan is through the Community of Pentrefoelas and it appears to us have closer community ties with Pentrefoelas than the adjoining Community of Bro Machno. We consider therefore that it would be appropriate to include the Community of Ysbyty Ifan in the same electoral division as the Community of Pentrefoelas (5.32 below).

5.30 The inclusion of the Community of Dolwyddelan and the exclusion of the Community of Ysbyty Ifan from the Uwch Conwy electoral division would result in an electoral division with a total of 1,477 electors (1,477 projected) which, if represented by one councillor, would be 6% below the existing county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and 16% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that this arrangement improves the level of electoral parity for the area and, we consider, will result in a more appropriate combination of communities. We put this scheme forward as a proposal. We have suggested Uwch Conwy be retained as the name for this electoral division. We would welcome any suggestions for alternative names.

Uwchaled

5.31 The Uwchaled electoral division consists of the Communities of Cerrigydrudion (578 electors, 606 projected), (169 electors, 169 projected) and Llangwm (427 electors, 427 projected) with a total of 1,174 electors (1,207 projected) represented by one councillor which is 23% below the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 33% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that it is not appropriate for such a large variation in the level of representation to exist between that of the Uwch Conwy electoral division and the county average. We therefore considered making changes to the electoral arrangements in this area.

- 10 - 5.32 At 5.25 above we considered the inclusion of the Community of Pentrefoelas (292 electors, 292 projected) in the Uwchaled electoral division and at 5.29 above we considered the inclusion of the Community of Ysbyty Ifan (166 electors, 166 projected) in the Uwchaled electoral division. These two additions would result in an electoral division with a total of 1,632 electors (1,660 projected) which, if represented by one councillor, would be 4% above the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor and 7% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that this arrangement improves the level of electoral parity for the area and, we consider, will result in a more appropriate combination of communities. We put this scheme forward as a proposal. We have suggested Uwchaled be retained as the name for this electoral division. We would welcome any suggestions for alternative names.

Llanddulas and

5.33 The electoral division consists of the Community of Llanddulas and Rhyd-y-Foel with 1,289 electors (1,396 projected) represented by one councillor which is 15% below the existing county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 26% below 1,750 electors per councillor. The adjoining Llysfaen electoral division consists of the Community of Llysfaen with 1,831 electors (2,279 projected) represented by one councillor which is 21% above the existing county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 5% above 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that it is not appropriate for a large variation to exist in the levels of representation between electoral divisions that are adjacent to each other and appear, to us, to be closely linked and of similar character. We therefore give consideration to a change to the electoral arrangements in the area.

5.34 Combining the electoral divisions of Llanddulas and Llysfaen will form an electoral division with a total of 3,120 electors (3,675 projected) which, if represented by two councillors, will result in a level of representation of 1,560 electors per councillor which is 1% below the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor and 11% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that this arrangement improves the level of electoral parity for the area and we put this scheme forward as a proposal. We have given the proposed electoral division a working name of Llanddulas and Llysfaen. We would welcome any suggestions for alternative names.

Penmaenmawr electoral divisions (Capelulo and Pant-yr-afon/Penmaenan)

5.35 The Capelulo electoral division consists of the Capelulo ward of the Community of with 1,209 electors represented by one councillor which is 20% below the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 31% below 1,750 electors per councillor. The Pant-yr-afon/Penmaenan electoral division consists of the Pant-yr-afon (1,495 electors, 1,626 projected) and Penmaenan (588 electors, 649 projected) wards of the Community of Penmaenmawr with a total of 2,083 electors represented by one councillor which is 37% above the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 19% above 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that such a large variation in the levels of representation between electoral divisions that are formed from wards of the same community is not appropriate. We

- 11 - are of the view that it would be desirable to make changes to the electoral arrangements in this area in order to achieve improvements in electoral parity.

5.36 We have considered the representation from Councillor Stevens (Pant yr Afon / Penmaenan electoral division) who noted that the Pant yr Afon and Penmaenan Community wards were joined together some 18 years ago to form an electoral division. He considered that, after some initial resentment amongst local people, this arrangement is now working well. We consider that an extension to this arrangement whereby the whole of the Community of Penmaenmawr forms an electoral division would equally work well in providing effective representation for the community.

5.37 An electoral division consisting of the Community of Penmaenmawr would have 3,292 electors which, if represented by two councillors, will result in a level of representation of 1,646 electors per councillor which is 5% above the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor and 6% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We note that this proposal creates a 2-member electoral division from two single-member electoral divisions but we consider that this arrangement improves the level of electoral parity for the area. We put this scheme forward as a proposal. We have given the proposed electoral division a working name of Penmaenmawr. We would welcome any suggestions for alternative names.

Marl and Pensarn

5.38 The Marl electoral division consists of the Marl ward of the Community of Conwy with 2,882 electors (3,640 projected) represented by two councillors with a level of representation of 1,441 electors per councillor which is 5% below the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 18% below 1,750 electors per councillor. The adjoining Pensarn electoral division consists of the Pensarn ward of the Community of Conwy with 2,081 electors (2,175 projected) represented by one councillor which is 37% above the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 19% above 1,750 electors per councillor. The other two Conwy electoral divisions are Conwy (with 1,655 electors per councillor) and Deganwy (1,641 electors per councillor). We consider that is not appropriate for a large variation to exist in the levels of representation between electoral divisions that are formed from wards of the same community and give consideration to a change to the electoral arrangements in the area.

5.39 Combining the existing electoral divisions of Marl and Pensarn would form an electoral division with a total of 4,963 electors (5,815 projected) which, if represented by three councillors, will result in a level of representation of 1,654 electors per councillor which is 5% above the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor and 5% below 1,750 electors per councillor. This would result in all three Conwy electoral divisions having similar levels of representation based on the existing number of electors. We have noted that the County Borough Council have forecast a rise of 758 electors for the Marl ward and a rise of 94 electors for the Pensarn ward. If this rise in the number of electors were to come about then this would result in the combined electoral division having 5,815 electors with a level of representation of 1,938 electors per councillor. This compares with the forecast levels of 1,686 electors per councillor for Deganwy and 1,697 for

- 12 - Conwy. This variance however is not as large as the current variance. The combination of the Marl and Pensarn electoral divisions would therefore provide an improvement in the level of electoral parity in the area. We put this scheme forward as a proposal. We have given the proposed electoral division a working name of Conwy East. We would welcome any suggestions for alternative names.

Abergele Pensarn and Pentre

5.40 The Pensarn electoral division consists of the Pensarn ward of the Community of Abergele with 1,958 electors (2,068 projected) represented by one councillor which is 29% above the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 12% above 1,750 electors per councillor. The adjoining Pentre Mawr electoral division consists of the Pentre Mawr ward of the Community of Abergele with 2,786 electors (2,812 projected) represented by two councillors with a level of representation of 1,393 electors per councillor which is 8% below the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 20% below 1,750 electors per councillor. The remaining Abergele electoral division is Gele which consists of the Gele (3,648 electors, 3,689 projected) and St George (214 electors, 214 projected) wards of the Community of Abergele with a total of 3,862 electors (3,903 projected) represented by 3 councillors with a level of representation of 1,287 electors per councillor which is 15% below the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 26% below 1,750 electors per councillor. We consider that is not appropriate for a large variation to exist in the levels of representation between electoral divisions that are formed from wards of the same community and give consideration to a change to the electoral arrangements in the area.

5.41 Due to the relative positions of the community wards and the number of electors in them the options are limited for making changes that go some way in improving the level of electoral parity in the area. One option would be to combine the existing Abergele Pensarn and Pentre Mawr electoral divisions to form an electoral division with a total of 4,744 electors (4,880 projected) which, if represented by three councillors, result in a level of representation of 1,581 electors per councillor which is 1% above the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor and 10% below 1,750 electors per councillor. Although this would provide a level of representation that is closer to the proposed county average we note that it would still vary from that of the Gele electoral division, although to a lesser degree than the current arrangements. The combination of the Pensarn and Pentre Mawr electoral divisions would therefore provide an improvement in the level of electoral parity in the area. We put this scheme forward as a proposal. We have given the proposed electoral division a working name of Pensarn and Pentre Mawr. We would welcome any suggestions for alternative names.

Llandrillo yn Rhos

5.42 The electoral division consists of the Community of Rhos on Sea with 6,169 electors (6,353 projected) represented by 4 councillors with a level of representation of 1,542 electors per councillor which is 2% above the county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and is 12% below 1,750 electors per councillor. The Community of Llandrillo yn Rhos is divided for community electoral

- 13 - purposes into the community wards of Dinarth (2,270 electors, 2,270 projected) and Rhos (3,899 electors, 4,083 projected).

5.43 In their representation the Bay of Colwyn Town Council (Rhos on Sea is part of the group council) recommended the formation of two electoral divisions based on the Dinarth and Rhos community wards. A Dinas electoral division would have 2,270 electors (2,270 projected) which, if represented by two councillors, result in a level of representation of 1,135 electors per councillor which is 28% below the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor and 35% below 1,750 electors per councillor. If represented by one councillor the level of representation would be 45% above the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor. A Rhos electoral division would have 3,899 electors (4,083 projected) which, if represented by two councillors, result in a level of representation of 1,950 electors per councillor which is 24% above the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor. If represented by three councillors the level of representation of 1,300 electors per councillor would be 17% below the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor and 26% below 1,750 electors per councillor.

5.44 As can be seen from these figures the suggestion to form electoral divisions from the Dinarth and Rhos community wards would only serve to increase the variance from the county average of the area’s level of representation. We therefore propose no changes to the existing Llandrillo yn Rhos electoral division.

Summary of Proposed Arrangements

5.45 The proposed electoral arrangements (as shown at Appendix 3) provide a level of parity that ranges from 18% below to 21% above the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor (based on the existing electoral figures). 10 of the electoral divisions have levels of representation more than 10% above or below the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor and the remaining 21 (68%) all less than 10% above or below the proposed county average of 1,568 electors per councillor. This compares with the existing electoral arrangements (as shown at Appendix 2) where the level of parity ranges from 43% below to 37% above the current county average of 1,515 electors per councillor. 7 electoral divisions (18%) having levels of representation more than 25% above or below the current county average of 1,515 electors per councillor, 13 (34%) electoral divisions having levels of representation between 10% and 25% above or below than the current county average of 1,515 electors per councillor and the remaining 18 (47%) electoral divisions having levels of representation less than 10% above or below the current county average of 1,515 electors per councillor.

5.46 In producing a scheme of electoral arrangements it is necessary to have regard to a number of issues contained in the legislation and in the Minister’s Direction. It is often not possible to resolve all of these sometimes conflicting issues because of the requirement of using the existing community and community wards as building blocks of electoral divisions and the varying level of representation that currently exists within these areas. In our proposed scheme we have placed emphasis on achieving improvements in electoral parity, moving towards 1,750 electors per councillor and retaining, where possible, single member electoral divisions. We

- 14 - recognise that the creation of electoral divisions which depart from the pattern which now exists would inevitably bring some disruption to established ‘ties’ between communities and may straddle community council areas in a way which is different. We have made every effort to ensure that the revised electoral divisions do reflect logical combinations of existing communities and community wards. We have looked at each of these areas and are satisfied that it would be difficult to achieve electoral arrangements that keep the existing combination of communities and community wards within single electoral divisions without having a detrimental effect on one or more of the other issues that are required to be considered. We recognise however that there may be different combinations of communities and community wards that better reflect community ties and we would welcome any alternative suggestions.

6. PROPOSALS

6.1. We propose a council of 57 members and 31 electoral divisions as set out in Appendix 3. For purposes of comparison the present electoral arrangements for the County Borough are given at Appendix 2. The boundaries of the proposed electoral divisions are shown by continuous yellow lines on the map placed on deposit with this Report at the Offices of Conwy County Borough Council and the Office of the Commission in Cardiff.

6.2. This draft scheme represents our preliminary views on the electoral arrangements for the County Borough of Conwy. We shall welcome any representations in respect of these proposals. We will consider carefully all representations made to us in respect of them before formulating our final proposals and submitting them to the Welsh Assembly Government.

7. RESPONSES TO THIS REPORT

7.1. All observations on this draft scheme should be sent to:

The Secretary Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales Caradog House 1-6 St Andrews Place Cardiff CF10 3BE

not later than 3 June 2010.

- 15 - MR P J WOOD (Chairman)

REV. HYWEL MEREDYDD DAVIES BD (Deputy Chairman)

Mr D J BADER (Member)

E H LEWIS BSc. DPM FRSA FCIPD (Secretary)

April 2010

- 16 - Appendix 1

GLOSSARY OF TERMS USED IN THIS REPORT

Commission The Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales

Council size The number of councillors elected to the council

Directions issued to the Commission by the Government Directions under Section 59 of the 1972 Act

How many Councillors there should be on the council of local government area, the parts into which the area Electoral should be divided for the purpose of electing councillors, arrangements the number of councillors for each electoral division, and the name of any electoral area

The divisions into which principal areas are divided for the Electoral purpose of electing councillors, sometimes referred to divisions colloquially as wards

Electoral A review in which the Commission considers electoral review arrangements for a local government area

The number of persons entitled to vote in a local Electorate government area The principle that votes within a principal area should carry equal weight, measured by a comparison between Electoral parity an electoral division and the county average of the number of electors represented by a single councillor. Government The Welsh Assembly Government

Person or body who has an interest in the outcome of an electoral review such as the principal council concerned, Interested person local MPs, AMs and political parties, community and town councils

Multi Electoral division within a principal area represented by member more than one councillor division

Order made by the Government, giving effect to the Order proposals of the Commission, either as submitted or with modifications

The area governed by a principal council: in Wales, a Principal area County or County Borough.

- 1 - Appendix 1

In Wales, one of the unitary authorities: a County or Principal council County Borough council

The five-year forecast of the number of electors provided Projected electorate by the Council for the area under review

Body or individual person who responds to the Respondent Commission’s consultation by making representations or suggesting alternative proposals

Rules to be observed by the Commission in considering Rules electoral arrangements

Single Electoral division of a principal authority represented by member one councillor division

The Local Government Act 1972 as amended by the 1994 The 1972 Act Act

The 1994 Act The Local Government (Wales) Act 1994

A principal council - the single tier organ of local government, responsible for all or almost all local Unitary government functions within its area, which in Wales authority replaced the two tier system of county councils and district councils: a County Council, or a County Borough Council The electoral areas of Community Councils (not all Wards Community Council areas are warded). The term is also used to describe the principal council electoral divisions

- 2 - CONWY COUNTY BOROUGH COUNCIL Appendix 2 EXISTING COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP Page1

% % variance variance No. OF 2009 2014 2014 from No. NAME DESCRIPTION 2009 RATIO from COUNCILLORS ELECTORATE ELECTORATE RATIO County County average average The Pensarn ward of the Community of 1,958 29% 2,068 2,068 29% 1 Abergele Pensarn Abergele 1 1,958 The Communities of Betws-y-Coed, Capel 2 1 996 996 -34% 996 996 -38% Betws-y-Coed Curig and Dolwyddelan The Communities of Betws yn Rhos and 3 1 1,636 1,636 8% 1,671 1,671 5% Betws yn Rhos The Bryn and Lafan wards of the Community 4 1 1,378 1,378 -9% 1,487 1,487 -7% Bryn of Llanfairfechan 5 Caerhun The Communities of Caerhun and 1 1,637 1,637 8% 1,637 1,637 2% The Capelulo ward of the Community of 6 1 1,209 1,209 -20% 1,209 1,209 -24% Capelulo Penmaenmawr The Colwyn ward of the Community of Old 7 Colwyn 2 3,482 1,741 15% 3,618 1,809 13% Colwyn The Aberconwy and Castle wards of the 8 2 3,310 1,655 9% 3,393 1,697 6% Conwy Community of Conwy The Craig-y-Don ward of the Community of 9 2 2,797 1,399 -8% 2,877 1,439 -10% Craig-y-Don Llandudno 10 1 1,585 1,585 5% 1,585 1,585 -1% Crwst The Crwst ward of the Community of Llanrwst The Deganwy ward of the Community of 11 2 3,282 1,641 8% 3,372 1,686 6% Deganwy Conwy The Communities of Eglwysbach and 12 1 1,225 1,225 -19% 1,225 1,225 -23% Eglwysbach Llanddoged and Maenan The Eirias ward of the Community of Old 13 2 2,700 1,350 -11% 2,700 1,350 -15% Eirias Colwyn The Gele and St George wards of the 14 3 3,862 1,287 -15% 3,903 1,301 -19% Gele Community of Abergele The Glyn ward of the Community of Colwyn 15 Glyn 2 3,049 1,525 1% 3,153 1,577 -1% Bay The Gogarth ward of the Community of 16 2 3,007 1,504 -1% 3,139 1,570 -2% Gogarth Llandudno The Gower ward of the Community of 17 1 868 868 -43% 885 885 -45% Gower Llanwrst The Kinmel Bay ward of the Community of 18 3 4,548 1,516 0% 5,421 1,807 13% Kinmel Bay Kinmel Bay and Towyn The Community of Llanddulas and Rhyd-y- 19 1 1,289 1,289 -15% 1,396 1,396 -13% Llanddulas Foel 20 Llandrillo yn Rhos The Community of Rhos-on-Sea 4 6,169 1,542 2% 6,353 1,588 -1%

The Communities of Llangernyw and Appendix 2 21 1 1,169 1,169 -23% 1,197 1,197 -25% Llangernyw Pentrefoelas 22 Llansanffraid The Community of Llansanffraid 1 1,807 1,807 19% 1,873 1,873 17% The Communities of Llansannan and 23 1 1,478 1,478 -2% 1,510 1,510 -5% Llansannan CONWY COUNTY BOROUGH COUNCIL Appendix 2 EXISTING COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP Page2

% % variance variance No. OF 2009 2014 2014 from No. NAME DESCRIPTION 2009 RATIO from COUNCILLORS ELECTORATE ELECTORATE RATIO County County average average 24 Llysfaen The Community of Llysfaen 1 1,831 1,831 21% 2,279 2,279 43% 25 Marl The Marl ward of the Community of Conwy 2 2,882 1,441 -5% 3,640 1,820 14% 26 Mochdre The Community of Mochdre 1 1,472 1,472 -3% 1,472 1,472 -8% The Mostyn ward of the Community of 27 2 2,806 1,403 -7% 2,941 1,471 -8% Mostyn Llandudno The Pandy ward of the Community of 28 1 1,483 1,483 -2% 1,517 1,517 -5% Pandy Llanfairfechan The Pant-yr-afon and Penmaenan wards of 29 1 2,083 2,083 37% 2,275 2,275 42% Pant-yr-afon/ Penmaenan the Community of Penmaenmawr The Penrhyn ward of the Community of 30 2 3,798 1,899 25% 3,814 1,907 19% Penrhyn Llandudno The Pensarn ward of the Community of 31 1 2,081 2,081 37% 2,175 2,175 36% Pensarn Conwy The Pentre Mawr ward of the Community of 32 2 2,786 1,393 -8% 2,812 1,406 -12% Pentre Mawr Abergele The Rhiw ward of the Community of Colwyn 33 3 4,757 1,586 5% 5,120 1,707 7% Rhiw Bay The Towyn ward of the Community of Kinmel 34 1 1,879 1,879 24% 2,309 2,309 45% Towyn Bay and Towyn 35 Trefriw The Communities of Dolgarrog and Trefriw 1 997 997 -34% 997 997 -38% The Tudno ward of the Community of 36 2 3,659 1,830 21% 3,745 1,873 17% Tudno Llandudno The Communities of Bro Machno, Bro 37 1 1,274 1,274 -16% 1,274 1,274 -20% Uwch Conwy Garmon and Ysbyty Ifan The Communities of Cerrigydrudion, 38 Uwchaled Llanfihangel Glyn Myfyr and Llangwm 1 1,174 1,174 -23% 1,202 1,202 -25% TOTAL 59 89,403 1,515 94,240 1,597 Ratio is the number of electors per councillor Electoral figures supplied by Conwy County Borough Council

2009 2014

Greater than + or - 50% of County average 0 0% 0 0% Appendix 2 Between + or - 25% and + or - 50% of County average 7 18% 7 18% Between + or - 10% and + or - 25% of County average 13 34% 13 34% Between 0% and + or - 10% of County average 18 47% 18 47% COUNTY BOROUGH OF CONWY Appendix 3 PROPOSED COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP Page1

% % variance variance No. OF 2009 2009 2014 2014 from No. NAME DESCRIPTION from COUNCILLORS ELECTORATE RATIO ELECTORATE RATIO County County average average The Communities of Betws yn Rhos 537 1 Betws yn Rhos 1 1,636 1,636 4% 1,671 1,671 1% (564) and Llanfair Talhaiarn 825 (822) The Communities of Betws-y-Coed 452 Betws-y-Coed and 2 (443), Capel Curig 184 (184), Dolgarrog 1 1,624 1,624 4% 1,624 1,624 -2% Trefriw 337 (325) and Trefriw 680 (672) The Bryn 780 (886) and Lafan 576 (601) 3 Bryn 1 1,378 1,378 -12% 1,487 1,487 -10% wards of the Community of Llanfairfechan The Communities of Caerhun 1,108 4 Caerhun 1 1,637 1,637 4% 1,637 1,637 -1% (1,072) and Henryd 581 (565) The Colwyn ward of the Community of 5 Colwyn 2 3,482 1,741 11% 3,618 1,809 9% The Aberconwy 1,397 (1,411) and Castle 6 Conwy 1,963 (1,982) wards of the Community of 2 3,310 1,655 6% 3,393 1,697 3% Conwy The Marl 2,998 (3,640) and Pensarn 7 Conwy East 2,100 (2,175) wards of the Community of 3 4,963 1,654 5% 5,815 1,938 17% Conwy The Craig-y-Don ward of the Community 8 Craig-y-Don 2 2,797 1,399 -11% 2,877 1,439 -13% of Llandudno The Deganwy ward of the Community of 9 Deganwy 2 3,282 1,641 5% 3,372 1,686 2% Conwy Eglwysbach and The Communities of Eglwysbach 749 10 1 1,616 1,616 3% 1,644 1,644 -1% Llangernyw (739) and Llangernyw 888 (905) The Eirias ward of the Community of Old 11 Eirias 2 2,700 1,350 -14% 2,700 1,350 -18% Colwyn The Gele 3,666 (3,689) and St George 12 Gele 219 (214) wards of the Community of 3 3,862 1,287 -18% 3,903 1,301 -21% Abergele The Glyn ward of the Community of 13 Glyn 2 3,049 1,525 -3% 3,153 1,577 -5% The Gogarth ward of the Community of 14 Gogarth 2 3,007 1,504 -4% 3,139 1,570 -5% Llandudno The Kinmel Bay ward of the Community 15 Kinmel Bay 3 4,548 1,516 -3% 5,421 1,807 9% of Kinmel Bay and Towyn The Communities of Llanddulas and Rhyd- 16 Llanddulas and Llysfaen y-Foel 1,286 (1,396) and Llysfaen 1,916 2 3,120 1,560 -1% 3,675 1,838 11% (2,279) Appendix 3 17 Llandrillo yn Rhos The Community of Rhos-on-Sea 4 6,169 1,542 -2% 6,353 1,588 -4% The Communities of Llanrwst 2,488 18 Llanrwst (2,470) and Llanddoged and Maenan 475 2 2,939 1,470 -6% 2,956 1,478 -11% (486) The Community of Llansanffraid Glan 19 Llansanffraid 1 1,807 1,807 15% 1,873 1,873 13% Conwy COUNTY BOROUGH OF CONWY Appendix 3 PROPOSED COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP Page2

% % variance variance No. OF 2009 2009 2014 2014 from No. NAME DESCRIPTION from COUNCILLORS ELECTORATE RATIO ELECTORATE RATIO County County average average The Communities of Llansannan 1,077 20 Llansannan 1 1,478 1,478 -6% 1,510 1,510 -9% (1,074) and Llannefydd 451 (436) 21 Mochdre The Community of Mochdre 1 1,472 1,472 -6% 1,472 1,472 -11% The Mostyn ward of the Community of 22 Mostyn 2 2,806 1,403 -11% 2,941 1,471 -11% Llandudno The Pandy ward of the Community of 23 Pandy 1 1,483 1,483 -5% 1,517 1,517 -8% Llanfairfechan 24 Penmaenmawr The Community of Penmaenmawr 2 3,292 1,646 5% 3,484 1,742 5% The Penrhyn ward of the Community of 25 Penrhyn 2 3,798 1,899 21% 3,814 1,907 15% Llandudno Pensarn and Pentre The Pensarn ward of the Community of 26 3 4,744 1,581 1% 4,880 1,627 -2% Mawr Abergele The Rhiw ward of the Community of 27 Rhiw 3 4,757 1,586 1% 5,120 1,707 3% Colwyn Bay The Towyn ward of the Community of 28 Towyn 1 1,879 1,879 20% 2,309 2,309 40% Kinmel Bay and Towyn The Tudno ward of the Community of 29 Tudno 2 3,659 1,830 17% 3,745 1,873 13% Llandudno The Communities of Bro Machno 577 30 Uwch Conwy (554), Bro Garmon 558 (554) and 1 1,477 1,477 -6% 1,477 1,477 -11% Dolwyddelan 366 (369) The Communities of Cerrigydrudion 594 (606), Llanfihangel Glyn Myfyr 162 (169), 31 Uwchaled 1 1,632 1,632 4% 1,660 1,660 0% Llangwm 424 (427), Pentrefoelas 298 (292) and Ysbyty Ifan 161 (166) TOTAL 57 89,403 1,568 94,240 1,653 Ratio is the number of electors per councillor The number of electors for 2009 and 2014 (in brackets) are included in the description of those electoral divisions which comprise more than one community / community ward Electoral figures supplied by Conwy County Borough Council

2009 2014 Appendix 3 Greater than + or - 50% of County average 0 0% 0 0% Between + or - 25% and + or - 50% of County average 0 0% 1 3% Between + or - 10% and + or - 25% of County average 10 32% 13 42% Between 0% and + or - 10% of County average 21 68% 17 55% Appendix 4

- 1 - Appendix 4

- 2 - Appendix 4

- 3 - Appendix 4

- 4 - Appendix 5 SUMMARY OF INITIAL REPRESENTATIONS

Conwy County Borough Council decided not to submit a draft scheme for amendments to the current electoral arrangements but made the following observations:  There should be no reduction in the number of Councillors, as members feel that the current workload is becoming unmanageable. They pointed out that a new responsibility for specific scrutiny of crime and disorder matters were introduced from 1 October 2009 and a number of new and wider powers may be introduced as a result of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill.  It is felt that reducing the number of Councillors would make the role of Councillor less attractive to prospective younger candidates.  Any increase in size of electoral divisions could deter potential candidates from standing as there would be a corresponding increase in electioneering costs.  Particular note should be made of the sparsity of population in rural electoral divisions. Any reduction of councillor numbers in these areas would not assist the Council in its aim of ‘Bringing the Council closer to the Community’.  Some existing rural divisions are already very large and involve a lot of travelling. Some are ‘uncontested’ and any increase in size would act as a deterrent to potential candidates.  Single member representation, particularly in rural divisions, works well and Councillors do not feel that multi-member rural divisions would be welcomed by the public.  Consideration should be given to density of population and the fact that in some divisions there is a high turnover of transient residents, which isn’t reflected in the electoral statistics. Special consideration should also be given to areas where there is a large influx of tourists as their needs are often met by local members.  Particular attention should be paid to the Minister’s letter dated 12th May 2009 in relation to the ratio of electors to councillors particularly in respect of local communities having their own identifiable representation. They consider having a local councillor is essential to small communities. If electoral divisions are amalgamated the local knowledge possessed by the present local Councillor would be lost.  The and its culture have to be considered.  Multi-member divisions can cause an imbalance in the workload between members within the division. It is felt that the size of multi-member electoral divisions should be kept to a minimum to avoid democracy being further removed from the electorate.  As well as the electorate, additional functions that take up a Councillor’s time should be taken into account. For example schools, other public buildings and services, businesses, churches, voluntary organisations, tourist attractions, and public amenity spaces.  It is felt that looking at County electoral divisions independently of other democratic electoral areas (e.g. Town & Community Wards, Assembly and Parliamentary Constituencies) means that there will always be inconsistencies in the democratic process. The Boundary Commission should be working in partnership with the Electoral commission to gain a better understanding of the demographics of the County Borough.  Electoral divisions are used by government bodies and statutory agencies for planning services and infrastructure. Any wholesale reduction in these units would mean a discontinuity of data and the diminishing of localised issues and problems.

- 1 - Appendix 5 Councillor Andrew Hinchliff (Bryn electoral division) wrote to express a preference for single-member wards [electoral divisions]. If any changes have to be made, he would prefer to wholly represent Llanfairfechan, rather than joining it with Penmaenmawr, as the boundary would be clearly defined.

Councillor Jason Weyman (Deganwy electoral division) wrote to echo the comments made in the Council’s representation. In addition, following the publication of the Commission’s Draft Proposals reports for Denbighshire, Neath and Newport, he added his own personal views on the Commission’s task:

1. The Ratio: From the results of Denbighshire it is evident that the Commission have seen this as a prescribed target to hit as a minimum based on 2014 electorate figures. This is concerning as in the later presentations it was suggested that the 1:1750 figure was a guide. This seems to be backed by the views presented in the Dr Gibbons AM letter dated 13th May.

2. Parity: The issue of parity has been resolved to a certain extent in the Denbighshire Draft Proposal but at the detriment of the role of the Councillor and the ability for them to perform the role. Of particular concern is the number of Multi-Member divisions and the very large size of some of the resulting divisions. He understands that the Commission is restricted by the “building blocks” that already exist. But the results have been suggested as being “strange” by the WLGA and “bizarre” by the minister. It is felt that the reason for this is that the Electoral Divisions can not be considered in isolation from other democratic represented areas (e.g. Community wards).

3. Impact on Community / Town Councils During the representations and in the guidelines it implies that these councils will not be affected by the review. This may be true of this particular review, but it is noted that any significant changes in the Electoral Divisions could cause some future discrepancies between County Councillor representation and Town/Community Councils. Hence the likelihood would be that future reviews of the Town/Community Council; would be to realign them to the Electoral Divisions. At this time Conwy does not have any significant issues in this area as the wards and community/town councils are very closely aligned. This synergy should be maintained.

4. Number of Councillors It is recognised that there may be some impact to the number of Councillors, it would be hoped that this could be kept to a minimum. The fact there are some discrepancies in the number of electorate does not affect the democratic process in practice. If this was perceived as an issue there may be other ways of solving this issue rather than reducing the number of councillors (i.e. weighted voting). At the end of the day nobody within the county is suffering as a result of the current arrangements. It is strongly recognised that there are geographical issues with the rural areas of the County that mean that rural councillors may have a reduced number of electorate. The Councillor does not have any issue with this and feels it helps to secure the delicate Welsh Language and Culture in the county.

5. Size and Number of Divisions

- 2 - Appendix 5 Of particular concern from results of the issued Draft Proposals is the vast reduction in the number of Divisions and the excessive size of the proposed new Divisions. Some of the sizes of proposed divisions in Denbighshire are for electorate of between 5000 and 7800. This is totally unworkable from the point of view of a councillor’s ability to serve this many electorate. Although the wards are multi-member the reality is that each individual member within that ward would be expected to understand, connect and respond to any of the electorate in that division. Even if it was possible to force all members within the division to work closer together the reality is that due to Political and Personal differences that may not be possible. At times of producing newsletters/election literature the cost of printing and distribution of such material will make it very expensive and will deter many from standing for election in these divisions. For Independent Councillors, constraints are more profound in this matter as we do not have the additional support from Political Parties in this respect. If I ended up in a division this large I would really have to consider whether I would be able to represent that number of electorate to the standard they deserve and expect. If the councillor had the choice he would accept more electorate but within a Single- Member division. The councillor would ask that the maximum number of members within a division be restricted to 2. This not only aids the cooperative working of the members but also keeps the electorate to a manageable level. Although not part of the direction issued at the beginning of the process the councillor would hope that the Commission take in the practicalities of fulfilling a Councillor’s role. A large number of Electorate, even if shared with other members, is not at all practical.

6. Cost of Change Are these changes really required? In the current economic climate any significant changes would take time, effort, resources and cost to implement. These resources would be better employed tackling the more important issues that affect all local authorities at this time. A crisis (which is what we all face) is not the time to implement a change of the magnitude that is being proposed within the Draft proposals. As mentioned by one of the speakers at the recent WLGA Member Development and Support conference “nobody is dying under the current arrangements”. The councillor recognised the Boundary Commission is an independent body and that it will be the Minister that will make the final decision, but the Councillor would see it as the responsibility being a responsible party that these considerations are taken into account when recommendations are formulated.

Councillor Dr Stuart Anderson (Kinmel Bay electoral division) considered that it is inevitable that Conwy and Denbighshire should merge and that if this happened it would make it easier to represent all of the towns in the area of the Abergele-Prestatyn-St Asaph triangle. It is his view that if (and only if) this merger happened then it may become easier and fairer for Kinmel Bay to be represented by two councillors instead of three.

Councillor Ken A. Stevens (Pant yr Afon / Penmaenan electoral division) wrote to say that the joining of Pant yr Afon and Penmaenan some 18 years ago, after some initial resentment amongst locals, is now working well.

Bay of Colwyn Town Council wrote that their members would like to recommend the following:

- 3 - Appendix 5 The Electoral Division of Rhiw be divided into 2 wards [electoral divisions]: Ward A (Rhiw North) Polling District AD1 plus the northern part of AD2 up to Lansdowne Road; Ward B (Rhiw South) Polling district AD3 plus the southern part of AD2 (southern part of Lansdowne Road.

The Electoral Division of Llandrillo-yn-Rhos reverts back to the former wards of Rhos and Dinarth (based on the existing Community wards).

Their recommendations are based on geographical size, electoral size (1 councillor to 1750 electors) and a sense of single community.

Betws-y-Coed Community Council wrote to object to the proposal that the aim should be to achieve electoral divisions with a councillor to electorate ratio no lower than 1:1750. They are of the view that the representation of rural communities should not solely be dependant on the number of persons within localities, and that other factors such as distances, remoteness etc. should also be a consideration if proper representation of the public is to be achieved.

Betws yn Rhos Community Council wrote to advise the Commission that they wholly oppose any intention of breaking up the democracy of Betws yn Rhos Electoral Division within Conwy County Council. The reasons are as follows:

i) There are currently 1609 voters within the constituency [electoral division]. With further housing developments within the constituency, the total is likely to reach the target of 1750. There is no perceived benefit in reorganising and impeding the current structure with such a small difference in the figures.

ii) Any change would mean disturbing the existing Community Council which would entail two different County Councillors having to attend monthly Community Council meetings as a result of combining one of the wards with a different constituency. This would only serve to confuse voters even more.

Llandudno Town Council submitted the following comments:  the sparsity of rural areas should be taken into account when deciding on the number of electoral divisions within the County to prevent wards becoming unmanageable and leading to disengagement from the democratic process by the community.  The Town Council is not supportive of larger electoral divisions with 3 or 4 members as they tend to reduce engagement between members and the community.  The review of the electoral arrangements for Conwy is premature until the Community Council boundaries have been reviewed.

Llanfairfechan Town Council wrote that the present situation of two electoral divisions, each being represented by one councillor, best serves the community.

Llangernyw Community Council wrote that if councils were to be combined they should be similar, e.g. language of meetings etc. Consideration should also be given to the extent and distance county councillors have to travel.

Llanrwst Town Council wrote to propose that Llanrwst Town be counted as a single ward [electoral division] represented by two county councillors. They consider that the

- 4 - Appendix 5 town is such a tight knit community that voters are often unaware which ward they belong to and when they have a problem they are likely to go to either of the two councillors. It makes sense therefore that the town would be better represented if the two councillors represented the town instead of each having their own part of the town to represent.

Gareth Jones AM (Aberconwy) is of the view that rigidly sticking to the councillor/electorate ratio of 1:1750 in every ward [electoral division] and reducing the number of electoral divisions will cause problems in rural areas of Conwy. Whilst, on paper, it is a laudable objective to have councillors representing the same number of electors in every ward, in practice, while addressing one inequality, this simplistic policy will have the effect of exacerbating another. It would be more sensible to strike a balance and devise a system of fair representation where an appropriate allowance was made to account for the relatively sparse rural population, and the geographical area of a rural electoral division was therefore limited to a manageable size.

Very large wards the size of Uwch Conwy, Betws yn Rhos, Llangernyw, Llansannan and Uwch Conwy and others, already present councillors with a significantly greater challenge in representing the electorate as effectively as their fellow councillors in urban wards. Consequently, electors are already potentially disadvantaged in the service they receive from their councillor. Furthermore, very large rural wards present any potential candidate, particularly an independent candidate, with a very significant challenge in canvassing their electorate. Many are put off by the difficulties the very large ward presents and that cannot be good for democracy. Reducing the number of divisions will only exacerbate these problems if even larger multi-member rural wards are created.

Mr Jones expressed the view that multi-member wards should be limited to perhaps two or three councillors at most concentrated in urban areas. It is his view that an existing urban ward like Llandrillo-yn-Rhos with four councillors and more than 6000 electors is already too large for the individual councillor to represent or canvass as effectively as they might.

A resident of Bodelwyddan wrote to express the view that including Bodelwyddan [currently within Denbighshire] within Conwy would be a major benefit to the residents. He considers that the cultures of the two councils are quite different and he has been disappointed with the reluctance of Denbighshire to properly engage with people in arriving at important decisions. He considers that the inclusion of Bodelwyddan within Conwy would be very popular within the community and it would have a clear benefit in safeguarding the Welsh language and culture of the area.

- 5 -

Top View