Local resident’s submissions to the Council electoral review

This PDF document contains submissions from local residents

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

Local Boundary Commission for Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Rother District

Personal Details:

Name: L Bennett

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Whatlington parish should go with and Westfield and would not increase the numbers by too many. we were a few years ago linked with Sedlescombe and should be again. We are linked with Sedlescombe by our churches. We have no link with Netherfield or Battle which is a small town I could not redraw the map but looking at it the area of does not fit in with Battle and Netherfield but would with Sedlescombe.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/7834 14/04/2016

Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

East County

Personal Details:

Name: john clarke

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Winchelsea , where we live,has little in common with the other villages in the Parish….but much in common with Rye. We therefore support the proposal to re-organise the boundaries

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/7914 25/04/2016 5/19/2016 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal

East Sussex County

Personal Details:

Name: CATHERINE COMOTTO E­mail: Postcode: Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I wholehearted agree with the suggestion to join with Rye as these two communities have so much in common both historically and currently; both are tourist attractions and conservation areas which other parishes are not and consequently such issues do not currently get the attention they deserve. Similarly the proposal to join with and Camber makes a great deal of sense as again they have shared issues as coastal settlements which could be better addressed. Grouping villages and towns together on the basis of the similarity of their location, history character and concerns and having a councillor who can focus on their particular needs and concerns makes far more sense than the current arrangement where villages are lumped together purely on the basis of geography regardless of the fact that they share few if any concerns. The new arrangements would make it much easier for the District Councillor to pay attention to the common problems and priorities of his/her electorate and potentially lead to greater engagement by the electorate who would feel they had a representative focused on the issues important to them. The improved clarity could help reverse the disconnect currently felt about District representatives. As a practical example, in the area of refuse collection, Winchelsea and Rye, being citadels, have difficulty with wheelie bins ; it was difficult to get the district council to focus on the problem as it was not an issue in the other villages . A single district councillor for Rye and Winchelsea would have been far more likely to be aware of this kind of issue. The current arrangement has Winchelsea, Rye Harbour, Winchelsea Beach and lumped together but these settlement have very little if anything in common and and while they may all lie along the A259 they are not contiguous and are all quite distinct. The proposed changes are to be welcomed; they are based on rational assesement of the villages rather than the current haphazd amalgamations and they will improve engagement and accountability.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed­representation/8055 1/1

Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

East Sussex County

Personal Details:

Name: George Donaldson

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

A proposal has been made to re-configure the local boundaries in the Rye/Winchelsea/Ickklesham area. I agree strongly with the suggestion that RYE and Winchelsea be combined (there is a strong shared emphasis on Conservation and, living in Winchelsea, I consider Rye to be the plece with which I have greatest affinity). The suggestion that the three coastal villages of Winchelsea Beach, Rye Harbour and Camber be combined and Icklesham be moved to the etc area also seems to make sense.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/7961 18/04/2016

Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

East Sussex County

Personal Details:

Name: june grindley

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Winchelsea is an ancient TOWN not a village. It should therefore be treated as a town, like Rye, not annexed to a village as it is a present. Because of its unique character and historic interest, it has responsibilities and needs which are very different from many local places. Like Rye, it attracts tourists and, were more known about the ruins and areas of the town so far unexplored archeologically, it could be even more attractive to tourists. These resources require careful nurturing and financial support which currently it does not get, being annexed to Icklesham.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/7917 15/04/2016 Starkie, Emily

From: Ward, Lucy Sent: 16 May 2016 12:08 To: Starkie, Emily Subject: Fw: Local Government Boundary Changes

From: Mayers, Mishka on behalf of reviews Sent: 16 May 2016 11:35:43 To: Ward, Lucy Subject: FW: Local Government Boundary Changes

From: ANN HADDOCK Sent: 14 May 2016 10:38 To: reviews Subject: Local Government Boundary Changes

We would like to support 's proposal that Icklesham Parish is split up for District Council Elections as follows:

Winchelsea to join Rye Icklesham to join Guestling and Rye Harbour and Winchelsea Beach to join Camber East Guldford and other villages.

Winchelsea is not a village but a Town albeit small. It has its own Mayor and Corporation and, like Rye, is a historic town and a conservation area. Winchelsea has a lot more in common with Rye than with any of the other Wards in Icklesham Parish.

Winchelsea is geographically separated from the other villages in the parish and is different in character. It also have different concerns from any of the other Wards and for these reasons there is a proposal to make Winchelsea into a parish of its own.

The existing parish has become very unwieldy because of the rapid growth in all four villages, two of which did not exist when the parish was originally created.

It would make sense to join Icklesham with Guestling as they are within a stones throw of one another and to join Winchelsea Beach and Rye Harbour with Camber as they are coastal villages.

The proposal has strong local support.

Ann & John Haddock

1

2 Starkie, Emily

From: Mayers, Mishka on behalf of reviews Sent: 27 June 2016 08:16 To: Starkie, Emily Subject: FW: Consultation on Proposed Radical Boundary Change affecting Parish

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed

From: Tony & Diane Hayes [ ] Sent: 18 June 2016 11:28 To: reviews Subject: Consultation on Proposed Radical Boundary Change affecting Udimore Parish

Dear Sirs

As residents of Udimore we strongly object to the Proposed Boundary Change for linking Udimore with part of the North Rother ward (with Robersbridge,, Beckley and ).

We have been linked with Brede Valley and Marsham ward for many years and would not like this to change. We have strong historical and social ties with Brede. Our Church in Udimore is part of and under the local rector who administers the two parish churches of Brede and Udimore. We share the same parish magazine and the same clergy ie Father John Lee and Father Martin Harper. We hold joint social gatherings and fund raisers and this proposed boundary split would cut across all our ties.

For many years we were part of the Brede and Udimore Branch of and Rye Conservative Association and that link would be torn.

Our new Community Hall in Udimore is regularly used not only by residents of Udimore but also by those in Brede and Broad Oak, for Pilates, Yoga, Messy Church, Vocality, Craft & Chatter and other social pursuits. Udimore Wild Life Association also includes interest from residents in Brede and Broad Oak.

We realise that we may have missed the deadline for our objection to these proposed Boundary Changes by a couple of days, but hope that our protest may nevertheless go on file please.

Best regards

Anthony and Diane Hayes

1 5/19/2016 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal

East Sussex County

Personal Details:

Name: David Hopkins E­mail: Postcode: Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I support the proposal to put Winchelsea with Rye for the purposes of the District Council elections. The two towns have historic links and far more in common than Winchelsea has with the villages with which it is currently linked at a parish level. I would in fact strongly support any proposal to establish a separate Winchelsea parish. Under the current arrangements, Wicnhelsea's interests too often appear to be given too little priority.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed­representation/8060 1/1 Starkie, Emily

From: Ward, Lucy Sent: 13 April 2016 11:41 To: Starkie, Emily Subject: FW: Winchelsea beach

One for you I think

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Mayers, Mishka On Behalf Of reviews Sent: 13 April 2016 11:03 To: Ward, Lucy Subject: FW: Winchelsea beach

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Sue Lyward Sent: 17 March 2016 18:01 To: reviews Subject: Winchelsea beach

Should Winchelsea beach not be included with rye and Winchelsea ? Sent from my iPad

1 5/19/2016 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal

East Sussex County

Personal Details:

Name: Jan & Chris Mears E­mail: Postcode: Organisation Name:

Comment text:

1 Winchelsea is small but it is not a village. Like Rye, it is an historic town and a conservation area. Winchelsea has more in common with Rye than with the other villages of the parish. As in Rye, conservation is therefore one of the key concerns, whereas it is not a concern for the rest of Icklesham Parish. 2 Historically, there are strong connections between Winchelsea and Rye, and we share institutions such as the Rye and Winchelsea Memorial Hospital. 3 Winchelsea is geographically separated from the other villages in the parish. It has a very different character and very different concerns. Indeed, for these reasons, there is a proposal to make Winchelsea into a parish on its own. The existing parish has become unwieldy due to the rapid growth of the four villages, two of which did not exist when the parish was created in the 19th century. The proposal has strong local support. 4 It also makes sense to join Icklesham with villages like Guestling, as they form part of the area. Winchelsea Beach and Rye Harbour could join Camber as they are coastal settlements. 5 Having the same District Councillors would focus their attention on our particular problems and priorities.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed­representation/8025 1/1

Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

East Sussex County

Personal Details:

Name: Richard and Ellenor Handley

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

We strongly support these proposals. Although ideally we would like to see Winchelsea as an entity (i.e. Parish) in its own right, given the somewhat disfunctional nature of the existing parish arrangements, due mainly to the disparate nature of its make-up. For ward purposes linkage with Rye, the other Ancient Town in the Cinque Ports Federation with whom we share an historic past, conservation problems etc. would make much more sense. These proposals also likewise make more sense for Icklesham, Rye Harbour and Winchelsea Beach.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/7954 15/04/2016 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

East Sussex County

Personal Details:

Name: Graham Rhodda

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

We understand that Rother District Council is proposing to split Icklesham parish into new groups: - Icklesham ward would be combined with Guestling, Fairlight and Pett - Rye Harbour and Winchelsea Beach would be combined with Camber and - Winchelsea would be combined with Rye As residents of Winchelsea, this proposal seems to us be a constructive one. Our perception is that the councillors from the present grouping of Icklesham parish have often disagreed with each other as their wards have very different needs and this seems to lead to bad feeling among them. We have heard reports of acrimony and the use of negative tactics to thwart the wishes and proposals of perceived ‘opponents’ within the council. The proposed new grouping appears to link ‘country’ wards, seaside wards and ancient town wards, whose populations are more likely to have similar needs and views. If this does prove to be correct, their councillors should be able to work more harmoniously and constructively with each other, enabling them to achieve more for the people that they represent. Rye is clearly a much larger place than Winchelsea and it has a more diverse population, but there are already strong connections between the two places. It too is an historic town and its councillors are likely to have a greater appreciation of both the needs and value of Winchelsea than seems to be the case with the present composition of the parish council. We realise that a council should not focus on conserving ancient buildings and customs rather meeting the needs of its current population, but the proposal to link Winchelsea to Rye as a parish seems to us to give a better chance of achieving a satisfactory balance between the two. Sally and Graham Rhodda

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/7930 15/04/2016

Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Rother District

Personal Details:

Name: Stephen turner

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Proposed changes to electoral recommendations for Rother District Council seem to be very heavily influenced by just a few comments and I feel do not reflect the views of the general public who seem to have no idea that this consultation is even taking place. The proposal seems to maintain the existing number of District Councillors so not real change at the top but within the Parish Councils I can understand a few changes to ensure electoral equality but why seek to fragment the representation for Icklesham Parish by placing one ward into Southern Rother, One ward into Rye and the remaining two wards remaining in Eastern Rother. Also it is proposed the second largest ward in the parish is to be absorbed into the smallest. This results in Winchelsea Beach vanishing completely with a total imbalance in the electoral representation at parish level. Winchelsea to Rye! Winchelsea is at the centre of Icklesham Parish both in terms of location and historical background it has a tenth of the electorate of Rye and Rye will always be the dominant part of this partnership. Within the existing representation Winchelsea is very much part of the countryside settlements outside of Rye and Eastern Rother's two councilors work very closely with the Parish and the other Parishes they serve. I feel the review should be more focused on the Parishes first to ensure a balance in representation, then look at the District ward boundaries to balance the representation at that higher level and if required move whole parishes. Two District Councillors serve Icklesham Parish but with the proposals Six would serve IcKlesham. Will they be able to attend Parish Council meetings as they do now? Will the representation be as effective as it now is? I think NO is the answer to that. These proposals do not reflect community identity within Icklesham Parish. They certainly do not provide for effective and convenient local government and at parish level certainly do not improve electoral equality in the Rye Harbour and Winchelsea Beach wards. Please review these proposals and for real consultation arrange a parish survey to engage directly with the electorate affected by this review as most are totally unaware it is taking place.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/7959 14/04/2016 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

East Sussex County

Personal Details:

Name: Graham Welch

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I am writing to support the suggested change to include Winchelsea and Rye in the same local Government area. Both are historic towns and have a long association with each other. They share concerns related to the preservation of historic buildings and it makes sense for the local administration to be more joined up. I have lived in Winchelsea for seventeen years and there seems to be little real connection on the ground for the current local government links between Ickelsham and Winchelsea in terms of community concerns. In contrast, we share much stronger cultural (musical), historical and medical links with Rye as part of the local infrastructure and voluntary activity. Many thanks!

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/7913 15/04/2016