Introduction The Electoral Review Panel (ERP) has prepared a scheme for 70 divisions for the County Council in response to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England’s consultation on future division arrangements. The Panel has considered each district in turn and has invited stakeholders to take part in the process, to come up with schemes that provide good levels of electoral equality, as well as good community cohesion. The LGBCE wrote to the County Council on 23 June 2015 to say that its proposed Council size is 70 members, by removing one seat in the Adur district. It accepted the County Council’s 2021 electoral projection figures. The number is a ‘preferred figure’ as the LGBCE accepts that a slight variation may be needed when detailed schemes are prepared. Its public consultation was launched, inviting proposals from any interested party on a division pattern for the County Council which meets the Commission’s statutory criteria: Delivering electoral equality for local voters – this means ensuring that each councillor represents roughly the same number of voters so that the value of your vote is the same regardless of where you live in the local authority area. Interests and identities of local communities – this means establishing electoral arrangements which, as far as possible, avoid splitting local ties and where boundaries are easily identifiable Effective and convenient local government – this means ensuring that the divisions can be represented effectively by their elected representative(s) and that the new electoral arrangements as a whole, including both the council size decision and warding arrangements, allow the local authority to conduct its business effectively. The ERP arranged weekly meetings from late June until mid-July to consider division schemes district by district. It met in different locations and invited all local members to attend. Invitations were also sent to district councils, parish council clerks and representatives of local political associations, to attend and comment at the meetings. As the ERP’s initial view was that 69 members provides greater electorate equality than 70 members, it has considered both scenarios. There were to be the same number of councillors as current in five districts, a reduction from six to five in Adur and either 11 or 12 in Horsham. The goal of a review is to create divisions that have electorates both in 2015 and 2021 that are no more than 10% above or below the ‘electoral ratio’ (which is the ratio of the county-wide electorate divided by the number of councillors). This satisfies the legal requirement for councillors to represent roughly the same number of electors across the county. Divisions should also have as much co- terminosity (coincidence of district ward and county division boundaries) and community cohesion as possible. The LGBCE has made it clear that it would prefer proposals that are satisfactory in 2021 even if they are not so good in 2015. They prefer this to the opposite. The data which has been worked on is the 2015 electorate and the 2021 projected electorate by polling district. The polling districts (which in rural areas are often the same as the parish) have, in the main, been regarded as the basic building blocks for the composition of a division and have only been divided if necessary to create an acceptable division numerically. Seven spreadsheets for seven districts were created showing the composition by polling district of the divisions currently. These spreadsheets could then be manipulated to show the numeric effect of either moving a polling district to another division or splitting a polling district between two divisions. Any number of options could then be easily investigated. The Panel meetings examined a number of proposals for each district and after modifications, some minor, some more major, the Panel has agreed on seven proposals for seven districts to take forward. The details of these proposals with maps, numbers and justification are enclosed in this appendix pack. The reason for the review is that currently 23 out of 71 (32%) of the County Council’s divisions are out of the 10% band (i.e. more than 10% bigger or smaller than the county electoral ratio). The proposals have 14 outside the band in 2015 (but four only very slightly outside) and only four outside the band in the more important 2021 projection (but two only very slightly outside). There are some proposed division of polling districts but these have been kept to a minimum in line with the general principle of minimal changes as the existing pattern of divisions is felt to be good in terms of community identity. The County Council therefore believes that the enclosed scheme provides a strong arrangement for the future of West Sussex electoral divisions. With only four divisions outside the -/+10% tolerance by 2021, it believes that this scheme is well future-proofed to take account of the significant levels of development that are likely to occur across many areas. Its strong view is that 70 members is appropriate for good representation in the future. Electoral data Check my data 2014 2020 Using this sheet: Number of councillors: 70 70 Fill in the cells for each polling district. Please make sure that the Overall electorate: 622,815 663,675 names of each parish, parish ward, district ward & county division are Average electorate per cllr: 8,897 9,481 Scroll right to see the second table Scroll left to see the first table What is the Which county division is this polling district What is the What is the Is there any other description you Is this polling district contained in a parish? Fill in the name of each ward once. You can Fill in the number of Do not type in these cells. These cells will show you the electorate & variance. They polling district in? This columm is not essential, but may current forecast use for this area? If not, leave this cell blank. also use the drop down list to select the ward. councillors per ward change depending what you enter in the table to the left. code? help you. electorate? electorate? Polling Electorate Electorate Number of cllrs Electorate District Parish District ward Proposed county division Name of division Electorate 2015 Variance 2015 Variance 2021 district 2015 2021 per division December 2021 AX Adur Lancing Southwick Green Shoreham East 1090 1112 Shoreham East 1 9,583 8% 9,890 4% AS1 Adur Lancing St Mary's Shoreham East 1215 1240 Lancing 1 9,839 11% 10,054 6% AW Adur Lancing Southwick Green Southwick 1240 1265 Shoreham West 1 9,312 5% 9,661 2% AV Adur Lancing Southlands Shoreham East 1244 1269 Sompting & North Lancing 1 9,983 12% 10,176 7% AS Adur Lancing St Mary's Shoreham East 1247 1273 Southwick 1 9,177 3% 9,375 -1% AU Adur Lancing Southlands Shoreham East 1696 1731 Angmering & Findon 1 8,203 -8% 8,747 -8% AO1 Adur Lancing Mash Barn Lancing 1198 1224 Arundel & Wick 1 7,935 -11% 10,082 6% AM Adur Manor Sompting & North Lancing 1381 1412 Bersted 1 9,246 4% 9,967 5% AD Adur Churchill Lancing 1471 1504 Bognor Regis East 1 9,442 6% 9,552 1% AC Adur Churchill Lancing 1964 2007 Bognor Regis West & Aldwick 1 9,635 8% 9,831 4% AO Adur Mash Barn Lancing 2118 2165 East Preston & Ferring 1 9,947 12% 10,191 7% AY Adur Widewater Shoreham West 1474 1506 Felpham 1 8,482 -5% 9,205 -3% AZ Adur Widewater Lancing 3088 3154 Fontwell 1 8,958 1% 9,724 3% AN Adur Coombes Marine Shoreham West 3546 3622 Littlehampton East 1 9,903 11% 9,983 5% AT1 Adur Sompting St Nicholas Shoreham West 748 790 Littlehampton Town 1 7,958 -11% 8,108 -14% AR Adur Sompting St Mary's Shoreham West 1178 1244 Middleton 1 8,398 -6% 8,888 -6% AA Adur Sompting Buckingham Shoreham East 1337 1412 Nyetimber 1 9,154 3% 9,187 -3% AB Adur Coombes Buckingham Shoreham East 1754 1853 Rustington 1 9,695 9% 9,737 3% AT Adur Sompting St Nicholas Shoreham West 2366 2499 Bourne 1 9,427 6% 9,715 2% ALA Adur Manor Sompting & North Lancing 34 35 Chichester East 1 9,088 2% 10,527 11% AQ Adur Peverel Sompting & North Lancing 1565 1594 Chichester North 1 8,909 0% 10,304 9% AE Adur Cokeham Sompting & North Lancing 1630 1661 Chichester South 1 8,985 1% 9,537 1% AF Adur Cokeham Sompting & North Lancing 1750 1783 Chichester West 1 9,372 5% 9,575 1% ALB Adur Manor Sompting & North Lancing 1801 1835 Rother Valley 1 8,742 -2% 9,549 1% AP Adur Peverel Sompting & North Lancing 1822 1856 Midhurst 1 8,522 -4% 8,985 -5% AG Adur Poling Eastbrook Southwick 813 831 Petworth 1 9,545 7% 9,783 3% AI Adur Patching Eastbrook Southwick 1037 1059 Selsey 1 8,567 -4% 8,757 -8% The Witterings Adur Clapham Southwick 1 8,975 1% 9,394 -1% AW1 Southwick Green 1146 1171 AK Adur Angmering Hillside Southwick 1519 1552 Bewbush & Ifield West 1 9,223 4% 9,692 2% AH Adur Angmering Eastbrook Southwick 1552 1586 Broadfield 1 9,090 2% 9,469 0% AJ Adur Findon Hillside Southwick 1870 1911 Langley Green & Ifield East 1 9,473 6% 9,848 4% APOL Arun Angmering Arundel & Walberton Angmering & Findon 147 155 Northgate & West Green 1 7,892 -11% 10,000 5% APAT Arun Angmering Angmering & Findon Angmering & Findon 209 217 Maidenbower & Worth 1 8,719 -2% 8,889 -6% ACLA Arun South Stoke Angmering & Findon Angmering & Findon 255 263 Three Bridges & Pound Hill South 1 7,795 -12% 8,575 -10% AANGS Arun Houghton East Preston Angmering & Findon 771 939 Pound Hill North 1 6,800 -24% 9,613 1% AANGBG Arun Warningcamp Angmering & Findon Angmering & Findon 1529 1537 Southgate & Gossops Green 1 9,803 10% 10,294 9% AFIN Arun Burpham Findon Angmering & Findon 1635 1643 Tilgate & Furnace Green 1 8,912 0% 9,294 -2% AANGN2 Arun