Officers reminded Members that the Council had agreed on 30 July 2025 to undertake a Community Governance Review (CGR), and that the first stage consultation had taken place between 18 December 2025 and 9 February 2026. It was reported that the work had been supported by officers and an all‑party Member Steering Group, and that the Chair of the Steering Group, Councillor Mike Whiting, had been invited to introduce the recommendations arising from the stage one consultation.

Councillor Whiting addressed the Committee and advised that the Steering Group had considered all consultation responses in detail and that changes had been made to the stage two consultation proposals to reflect points raised by respondents. It was emphasised that all responses had been read and carefully considered, and that the proposals before the Committee reflected those views. Thanks were expressed to officers for their support and guidance throughout the process. Councillor Whiting commended the report to Members and invited questions.

Members made comments and asked questions including:

• Concerned that reliance on online consultation could exclude residents who did not have digital access, and that further steps should be taken to ensure the widest possible participation in stage two of the consultation;
• requested  reassurance that parish councils and residents would have sufficient opportunity and time to respond to the second stage consultation;
• observations regarding proposed boundary changes in specific areas, including Murston, Bobbing, Grove Park and Snipshill, with questions about whether all potential boundary options had been appropriately illustrated through the consultation maps;
• queries about how responses would be assessed where views from residents directly affected by boundary changes were evenly split, and whether wider public responses would be taken into account.
• questions about how road names, postcodes and local identity would be considered when finalising parish boundaries.
• comments emphasising the importance of ensuring any new or altered parish councils were left with appropriate assets and boundaries to function effectively; and
• reassurance from members of the Steering Group that responses had been analysed carefully, including free‑text comments, and that discrepancies between tick‑box answers and written responses had been identified and taken into account.

Officers responded that:

• Stage two consultation would extend for nine weeks, longer than originally proposed, to ensure parish councils and residents had sufficient time to respond;
• parish councils would be formally written to at the start of the consultation and offered a range of response methods, including online and paper submissions;
• maps had been deliberately limited to a manageable number of options to avoid confusion, but respondents would still be able to suggest alternative boundary configurations through the consultation;
• all boundary proposals remained subject to change following the stage two consultation and further consideration by the Steering Group; and
• the process following stage two would involve further Steering Group meetings, with a report then returning to the Policy and Resources Committee and Full Council with final recommendations.

Resolved:

(1) That the results of the stage one consultation be noted.

(2) That the draft proposals and maps for stage two consultation be approved.

(3) That the stage two consultation be undertaken in accordance with the timetable and approach set out in the report.