Local Residents submissions to the North Somerset District Council electoral review This PDF document contains 18 submissions from Local Residents. Some versions of Adobe allow the viewer to move quickly between bookmarks. Click on the submission you would like to view. If you are not taken to that page, please scroll through the document. Cooper, Mark From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 02 April 2014 10:47 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Wraxall and Failand Parish - Review of N. Somerset Council ward boundaries From: Robert Hellen [ Sent: 02 April 2014 10:17 To: Reviews@ Subject: Wraxall and Failand Parish – Review of N. Somerset Council ward boundaries I object most strongly to the proposal to split the Parish of Wraxall and Failand between the two Wards of “Wraxall and Gordano” and “Pill and Easton In Gordano” in North Somerset, following “Map B”. I have a strong preference for the proposals in “Map A” for the following reasons: I understand that this proposal results from objections from Portbury and Pill/Easton in Gordano that splitting the parish between two wards would create difficulties in reaching agreements between the representatives. The new proposal regarding Failand is much worse in that four elected representatives, rather than the two we currently have, would have to obtain a full understanding of the Parish Council’s concerns in order to properly represent them. If it was felt that splitting another parish might be problematic, what sense is there in splitting ours? This proposal would be highly detrimental to the interests of Wraxall and Failand Parish Council and the people it represents. The “Hands Off Failand Greenbelt” campaign is fresh in memory when the village of Failand had to fight land speculators who wanted to more than double the size of Failand’s built area. The widespread public support with help from the Parish Council and our two District Councilors who had an interest the entirety of the greenbelt land surrounding Failand resulted in development proposals being defeated. The proposed Ward boundaries would split the fields around Failand’s built area into no less than three wards. Instead of having just two District Councilors with responsibilities across the whole area there would be six, each of whose interests included only part of the area around Failand’s “triangle”. This would be unworkable in practice and significantly impair the ability of the councilors to properly represent the people who live here. Those with an eye to profiting from building on the green belt around Failand have not gone away and they remain ready to exploit any weakness offered them to build on Green Belt land. They would be keen to take advantage of the proposed reorganisation and the resulting splitting of representation and the resulting disorganisation. I therefore object strongly to this proposal as it is ill conceived, not conducive to good local government and definitely not in the best interests of the residents of Failand. R W Hellen 108 A paper copy of this objection has been posted to The Review Officer (North Somerset) Local Government Boundary Commission for England Layden House 76-86 Turnmill Street London. EC1M 5LG. 109 Cooper, Mark From: Egan, Helen Sent: 05 March 2014 11:20 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: North Somerset Council Ward Boundary Changes Hi Mark, Please see below a submission for North Somerset. Helen From: Jo & Andrew Hewitt Sent: 04 March 2014 19:31 To: Reviews@ Subject: North Somerset Council Ward Boundary Changes Dear Sir I understand that you are considering lumping several villages/parishes, including Wrington, into a single three member ward. Although all these villages are in the countryside of North Somerset, their geography and the issues that affect them can differ markedly. For instance, Wrington has suffered from flooding problems, at times exacerbated by the Council’s failure to clean gullies. We wish to have local representation to deal with local problems. With three councillors representing us, we are less likely to get the focussed attention that we need on those issues that affect us. Please ensure that Wrington residents are represented by a single Councillor. Best regards Andrew Hewitt 1 Cooper, Mark From: Egan, Helen Sent: 07 April 2014 11:00 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Proposed boundary changes Hi Mark, Please see below sub for NS. Helen From: John Hibberd Sent: 06 April 2014 18:30 To: Reviews@ Subject: Proposed boundary changes North Somerset – Congresbury We are concerned that the most recent suggestions for local government boundary changes in our area (Congresbury, N. Somerset) greatly reduce the personal link between an elected councillor and the communities he/she represents. We live in a large village with strong community involvement; we can approach our councillor on matters of concern, knowing that he will be well informed and able to follow up issues energetically. If our village is swallowed up in a much larger area ‐ served by 3 different councillors – this strong link with our councillor will be lost. Councillors can hardly campaign effectively across such an area, nor can electors know who to vote for if they do not have an existing local connection. Local councillors need to be just that – individuals who are known and valued by their own communities. Susan and John Hibberd 6 April 2014 34 Cooper, Mark From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 02 April 2014 15:28 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: North Somerset Parish Boundaries Objection From: Carol Hickleton Sent: 02 April 2014 15:22 To: Reviews@ Subject: North Somerset Parish Boundaries Objection 2nd April 2014 The Review Officer (North Somerset) Local Government Boundary Commission for England Layden House 76-86 Turnmill Street London. EC1M 5LG. Email : [email protected] Re: North Somerset Proposed Ward Boundary Changes. Dear Sirs, I wish to object to the revised proposed changes to the ward boundaries for North Somerset as depicted by Map B. These changes would have a detrimental effect on local democracy and the community identity in the parish of Wraxall & Failand. The Wraxall & Failand Parish is currently wellserved by two District Councillors, the proposals shown at Map B divides our parish between two wards and four Councillors, who are unlikely to have theexperience of this parish. This would significantly impair good local government in our parish. The large number of parishes within the wards shown in Map B implies that District Councilors would have to attend up to 8 Parish Council meetings per month to fulfill their duties. This is an absurd concept. 92 When one considers the close affinity of Wraxall and Failand Parishes for over 100 years, the vast knowledge gained in how the Parish and its peoples function, the roads, the community and local knowledge, then the new scheme, as listed, is ridiculous. One only has to look at the geographic area in which Wraxall and Failand are situated to see that it must be logical to keep the boundaries as they are, not to move the control to an entirely new area. From past experience, big is not always better and the human touch is lost, particularly when it affects the residents of that area, after all, its us who vote the politicians in. How one can elect a politician/councillor from an area so far away and who has no close ties with the community is beyond us. The ward boundaries proposed do not reflect the geography of the area or the local communities. The original proposal that associated Wraxall & Failand with Long Ashton referred to as ‘Map A’ is a much better solution. I urge you to revert to this proposal. Yours Sincerely, E & C S Hickleton 93 Cooper, Mark From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 03 April 2014 16:18 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Proposed boundary changes re Brockley From: geoff higham Sent: 03 April 2014 09:57 To: Reviews@ Subject: Proposed boundary changes re Brockley Sir, My wife and I wish to object to the proposed boundary changes in relation to the appointment of District Councillors for Brockley . Geoff & Judy Higham 81 Cooper, Mark From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 08 April 2014 10:21 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: changes to winford ward ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: bryony hilton Sent: 07 April 2014 13:59 To: Reviews@ Subject: changes to winford ward I would like to register my objection to the proposal to include Winford in the Long Ashton ward. I have a house in Winford and during the four years I have lived here I have never had reason to go to Long Ashton because it is geographically very separate and there isn't a convenient road connection between the two villages. Also I think the concerns of the residents of Long Ashton will be different from those of the residents of Winford because Winford is a traditional village with many farming families, while Long Ashton is largely a suburb of Bristol. The greater numbers of households in Long Ashton will mean that people in Winford, Barrow Gurney, Dundry, Regil and Felton will be effectively disenfranchised because the councillors will always be elected by Long Ashton and will therefore devote most of their time to those electors. Under the last government there was a proposal for extensive housing development around Long Ashton which may well happen in future leading to the other villages having even less say in planning decisions affecting them. I would like to see reversion to the initial proposal for Winford ward, including Barrow Gurney, Flax Bourton, Dundry, Regil, Felton and Winford, yours sincerely, Dr Christopher hilton 12 Cooper, Mark From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 27 March 2014 15:06 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: North Somerset Proposed Ward Boundary Changes From: John Holden Sent: 27 March 2014 14:43 To: Reviews@ Subject: North Somerset Proposed Ward Boundary Changes 27 March 2014 The Review Officer (North Somerset) Local Government Boundary Commission For England Layden House 76‐86 Turnmill Street London EC1M 5LG Re: North Somerset Proposed Ward Boundary Changes.