Potential Changes to Forum Boundaries in South Lakeland
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Report COUNTY COUNCIL LOCAL COMMITTEE FOR SOUTH LAKELAND No Meeting Date: 8th May 2003 12 From: CORPORATE DIRECTOR - COMMUNITY, ECONOMY & ENVIRONMENT (2) POTENTIAL CHANGES TO FORUM BOUNDARIES IN SOUTH LAKELAND 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 This report proposes the splitting of the High Furness Forum into two separate forum areas. The report also asks Members to consider dividing the Kendal forum into a Kendal Town and Kendal Rural forums or separate division forums within the Kendal area. 2.0 POLICY POSITION AND BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS 2.1 Under its Executive Functions, the Local Committee has the authority to ‘determine the level and nature of Neighbourhood Development work’(Constitution paragraph 3B(m)). There are no direct budgetary implications as long as the overall scale of development work within forum areas is not significantly affected. 2.2 If the Local Committee wished to establish separate forums for each of the 5 Kendal Divisions, representing a significant growth in the number of forum areas, it would be necessary to recruit additional Neighbourhood Development staff at a cost to the Local Committee. If the Local Committee agreed in principle to 5 Kendal Division Forums a separate report would be presented to the next Local Committee with recommendations on how this proposal could be funded. 3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The Local Committee agree to the 3.1 The transfer of the parishes of Dunnerdale with Seathwaite, Broughton West, Angerton, Kirkby Ireleth, Blawith and Subberthwaite and Lowick into West High Furness Neighbourhood Forum. 3.2 The transfer of the parishes of Skelwith, Hawkshead, Coniston, Torver, Satterthwaite and Claife into East High Furness Neighbourhood Forum. That the Local Committee agree to either recommendations 3.3 or 3.4 3.3 Either the transfer of Kendal Parish into a Kendal Town Forum Area 3.4 Or IN PRINCIPLE the establishment of 5 separate forum areas for Kendal urban area 3.5 The transfer of the parishes of Natland, Stainton, Docker, Fawcett Forest/Longsleddale, Grayrigg, Lambrigg, Scalthwaitrigg, Skelsmergh, Whinfell, Whitwell & Selside, Strickland Ketel, Strickland Roger, New Hutton, Old Hutton & Homescales, Sedgwick, Firbank, and Killington into a Kendal Rural Forum. 4.0 BACKGROUND 4.1 Forum boundaries are regularly reviewed to reflect changes in administrative boundaries or to reflect views of local communities. The last review took place in March 2002. 4.2 On 26th January the Local Committee agreed to defer a proposal from the High Furness Neighbourhood Forum that the forum be split roughly east/west into two separate forum areas, viz: west to include the parishes of Dunnerdale with Seathwaite, Broughton West, Angerton, Kirkby Ireleth, Blawith and Subberthwaite and Lowick; east to include the parishes of:- Skelwith, Hawkshead, Coniston Torver, Satterthwaite and Claife. It is considered locally that this split would better reflect natural communities. It is anticipated that this would increase the total number of forum meetings (at present most forums meet 5 times a year) but that if the new forums met only four times a year this volume of work could be managed within the existing Neighbourhood Development budget. Approval is sought to establish these two forum areas. 4.3 An additional issue raised by some councillors has been the value of dividing the Kendal and District forum into a number of smaller areas. Although not the largest forum in Cumbria, the forum has by a significant margin the largest population within South Lakeland. This issue was discussed at the Members Planning Day on 12th May and Members asked that options be presented to this meeting. 4.4 Change options include: • creating one additional forum by separating Kendal from its hinterland to create a Kendal Town and Kendal Rural Forum; or • creating five Kendal forums, contiguous with division boundaries in Kendal plus a rural forum. 4.5 Each option would reduce overall forum populations and offer a better opportunity to reflect local community identity. This would also increase the overall number of forum meetings. 4.6 If Members wished to decrease the size of forum populations and reflect natural communities better there may be an advantage in recognizing the natural community identity of Kendal parish by creating a Kendal Town Forum and establishing a Kendal Rural Forum to cover the town’s hinterland. It is felt to be possible to manage quarterly meetings for these two forum areas within existing resource levels. 4.7 Forums contiguous with Kendal’s division boundaries would involve significant additional costs (eg a minimum of 4 meetings a year for 6 forums (24 meetings) rather than the 5 existing meetings). Practically this would require additional staff time and a need for additional funding either directly through the Local Committee General Provision Budget or from the forum grants budget. 4.8 If members felt that in principle this option should be supported, a detailed report outlining the total costs (expected to be in the region of £20,000) would be prepared for the next cycle. 4.9 If members agreed to the setting up a ‘Kendal Rural’ Forum this would include the following parishes: Natland, Stainton, Docker, Fawcett Forest/Longsleddale, Grayrigg, Lambrigg, Scalthwaitrigg, Skelsmergh, Whinfell, Whitwell & Selside, Strickland Ketel, Strickland Roger, New Hutton, Old Hutton & Homescales, Sedgwick, Firbank, and Killington. 5.0 OPTIONS 5.1 Agree to support the above changes or to retain existing boundaries. 6.0 CONCLUSION 6.1 The report asks members to consider changing boundaries in two existing neighbourhood forums. APPENDICES 1 Parish boundaries in South Lakeland IMPLICATIONS Staffing: There are no staffing implications Financial: There are no financial implications Electoral Division(s): High Furness; 5 Kendal Divisions Executive Decision Yes Key Decision No If a Key Decision, is the proposal published in the current Forward Plan? N/A Is the decision exempt from call-in on grounds of urgency? No If exempt from call-in, has the agreement of the Chair of the relevant N/A Overview and Scrutiny Committee been sought or obtained? N.B. If an executive decision is made, then a decision cannot be implemented until the expiry of the eighth working day after the date of the meeting - unless the decision is urgent and exempt from call-in and the Head of Member Services has obtained the necessary approvals. BACKGROUND PAPERS There are no background papers. Unfortunately it has not been able to include a map in this report because the Council’s e-mail system still does not permit the electronic transfer of these files of more than 1.8MB. A copy of a parish/forum boundary map will be available at the meeting. Contact: Stuart Pate Tel 01539 773435 email: [email protected] COVERING SHEET FOR COMMITTEE REPORTS Forum Boundaries – South Lakeland Title of Report Committee South Lakeland Author Stuart Pate Part I or II I Public Summary Enclosed: Yes/Not Applicable No of Appendices 2 Draft No 1 Checklist Persons Consulted: Members Planning Workshop 12th March (i.e. who has been consulted and who will be consulted) [Where a proposal has implications for a particular electoral division(s), the local member(s) must always be consulted) Corporate Parenting Implications: None (i.e. for Councillors as corporate parents or implications for looked after children) Environmental Implications: None (i.e. any impact on the environment, particularly in terms of LA21 - this will be the subject of further advice) Crime and Disorder Implications: None (i.e. any implications for reducing or preventing crime and disorder) Human Rights Act: None (Advice should be sought from Brian Walker, Head of Legal Services) N.B. This is just a checklist. Any implications detailed above should be addressed in the report. Cleared by Chief Officer/Unit Manager Area Support Manager Copied to Director of Finance and Central Services Head of Legal Services Other Directors (please list) Head of Members Service Unit Council Spokesperson/Chair Date of Pre-Agenda Meeting 10th April 2003 Final Report Yes/No .