North Yorkshire Council
15 July 2026
Recommendations Following the Second and Final Phase of the 2025/26 Community Governance Review
Report of the Assistant Chief Executive, Legal and Democratic Services
|
1.0 |
Purpose of Report
|
|
1.1
|
To consider the final recommendations of the Standards and Governance Committee made at the meeting of 30 June 2026 in relation to the consultation on the 2025/26 Community Governance Reviews (CGRs).
|
2.0 Summary
2.1 This report provides information on the recent Stage 2 consultation and provides a summary of the consultation responses. An analysis of the responses is provided and final recommendations made, based on the responses received from both Stages 1 and 2 of the consultation.
2.2 The report asks Council to agree the final recommendations for the CGRs which will determine the final outcome of the review.
2.3 The consultation process is an essential part of the CGR, and responses will be taken into account in producing the final recommendations.
3.0 Background
3.1 On 16 July 2025 Full Council approved the Terms of Reference (TOR) for a CGR for a defined number of parish areas. The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 (LGPIH Act 2007) devolved power from the Secretary of State to principal councils to conduct CGRs and put in place or make changes to local community governance arrangements.
3.2 Following the meeting on 16 July 2025 the TOR were published and the CGR began with the Stage 1 consultation taking place over 12 weeks from 29 September to 22 December 2025. This then formed the basis for the recommendations for the Stage 2 consultation which ran from 19 March to 11 June 2026.
3.3 The consultation results have been analysed and final recommendations developed for each of the areas under review. Full details of each review including analysis and development of the recommendations are available in the Appendices (1-14) to this report. Each individual survey is provided at Annex 1-14A and a summary and the full responses for each CGR is provided at Annex 1-14B of this report.
3.4 A summary of the outcomes from Stage 2 consultation is shown in the table below:
|
CGR |
No. of responses |
Response as a % of households in the relevant parishes |
|
Parish areas without a Parish Council requesting a Community Governance Review |
||
|
Barden |
19 |
14.7 |
|
Bolton on Swale |
5 |
1.1 |
|
Dunsforths * |
N/A |
N/A |
|
Rand Grange |
4 |
0.2 |
|
Spennithorne |
18 |
6.0 |
|
Thornthwaite with Padside |
1 |
0.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
Parish Councils or residents requesting a Community Governance Review |
||
|
Kirby Hill and District |
3 |
0.5 |
|
Lillings Ambo * |
N/A |
N/A |
|
Newall with Clifton |
3 |
0.3 |
|
Thorpe Willoughby |
368 |
12.6 |
|
Welburn * |
N/A |
N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
Parish Council has requested that the Parish Council be dissolved and a Parish Meeting be put in its place or a merger with a neighbouring parish |
||
|
Potto* |
N/A |
N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
Grouped parish councils which are not currently represented in each parish area and a Community Governance Review is therefore recommended |
||
|
Constable Burton and Finghall |
5 |
2.0 |
|
Hudswell and District |
12 |
5.9 |
|
Kirklington with Sutton Howgrave |
2 |
1.4 |
|
Thornton-le-Beans |
4 |
3.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Parish has internal ward boundaries which require clarification and would therefore benefit from a Community Governance Review |
||
|
Staintondale* |
N/A |
N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
Parish councils requesting a Community Governance Review with a view to reducing their council size to enable them to be quorate |
||
|
Escrick |
11 |
2.7 |
|
Sherburn |
44 |
10.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
499 |
|
* The results of the Stage 1 consultation negated the need for a further Stage 2 consultation on these parishes.
3.5 It is noted that whilst the responses to the consultation were mixed, a low response rate for this type of consultation is not unusual and the proposed recommendations meet the statutory criteria placed on NYC to ensure that community governance within the areas under the review will be reflective of the identities and interests of the community in that area and be effective and convenient.
3.6 In the Stage 1 consultation every property in the areas under review were sent an explanatory letter in the post, which signposted where further information ad future information about the review would be available. Whilst the Stage 2 consultation was completed completely digitally, residents were offered the option to request a paper copy of the survey if they were not able to complete the survey online. A frequently asked questions (FAQ) page was also created on the Council’s website to help the public with any queries or questions.
3.7 The recommendations being suggested are the final outcomes of the CGR process upon which the decision is then made.
3.8 Members are invited to note that parish councils and divisional representatives were also invited to respond to the CGR, as well as MPs in the relevant areas and the Yorkshire Local Council Association (YLCA).
4.0 Consultation Methodology
4.1 The Stage 1 consultation commenced on 29 September 2025 and ran for 12 weeks until 22 December 2025.The Stage 2 consultation ran for a further 12 weeks from 19 March to 11 June 2026.
4.2 A webpage was set up on the CGR area of the North Yorkshire Council (NYC) website where detailed information was provided on the reasons and scope for the CGR, timescales and terms of reference. The webpage contained links to all online surveys.
4.3 Parish councils were communicated with in order to help support the advertising of the CGR’s within their area. An information poster was created, with a QR code to access the surveys and parish clerks were asked to advertise this on parish notice boards. Residents were signposted to the NYC website to complete the relevant surveys.
4.4 An option was provided to request hard copies via telephone or email for those residents who preferred to complete a paper copy of the survey or who did not have access to the internet.
4.5 Key stakeholders were also emailed and invited to give their views. This included local MPs, Divisional Councillors for the relevant area, parish councils and the YLCA. Information was also included in the Parish Liaison bulletin sent to all parish councils monthly.
4.6 The surveys used can be found in Annex 1-14A of the report.
5.0 Next Steps
5.1 If Council approves the final recommendations contained within this report, the next stage in the review will be to create the CGR Orders and make the changes accordingly for implementation at the next scheduled elections in May 2027. The electoral register updates will be published on 1 December 2026.
Timescale:
11 June 2026 Stage 2 consultation closed
August 2026 CGR Orders made
May 2027 Implement any changes at scheduled elections
5.2 The overall timescales for the CGR are as follows:
|
Date |
Activity |
|
29 September 2025 |
Terms of Reference published 1st Stage consultation commences (12 weeks) |
|
22 December 2025 |
1st Stage consultation closes
|
|
11 February 2026 |
Standards and Governance Meeting to review stage 1 results and proposals for stage 2 consultation
|
|
18 March 2026 |
Full Council Meeting - consultation results and approval of proposals for 2nd Stage Consultation
|
|
19 March 2026 |
2nd Stage consultation commences (12 weeks) |
|
11 June 2026 |
2nd Stage consultation closes
|
|
30 June 2026 |
Standards and Governance Meeting to review stage 2 results and final proposals
|
|
15 July 2026 |
Council approves CGR outcome |
|
August 2026 |
CGR Orders made |
|
December 2026 |
1/12/26 Electoral register published |
|
Implement any changes at scheduled elections |
6.0 Consideration of Statutory Criteria
6.1 In developing draft recommendations the LGPIHA 2007 requires the council to take account of certain criteria when conducting a review, which are listed below. These statutory criteria are discussed within each report.
6.2 The council must have regard of the need to secure that community governance within the area under review:
· reflects the identities and interests of the community in an area;
· provides effective and convenient governance of the area; and
· takes into account any other arrangements for community representation or community engagement.
6.3 Councils are also advised to consider factors such as:
· what impact proposed community governance arrangements might have on community cohesion; and
· whether the size (area), population and boundaries proposed for local governance make sense on the ground and contribute to the above criteria.
6.4 When deciding whether to recommend that a parish should be formed, a council must consider the following factors:
· whether the number, or distribution, of the local government electors for the parish would make a single election of councillors impracticable or inconvenient;
· whether it is desirable that any area or areas of the parish should be separately represented on the council i.e. warded
· warding is a way of dividing a parish into smaller geographical areas, for the purpose of electing parish councillors. Each ward elects its own representatives, ensuring that different parts of the parish have a fair and balanced voice on the council. Warding is usually considered when a parish covers a large area or contains distinct communities that may benefit from separate representation.
· if the principal council decides to recommend that a parish should be divided into wards, then (a) the size and boundaries of the wards, and (b) the number of councillors to be elected for each ward.
7.0 Conclusions
7.1 The appendices to this report set out the draft final recommendations in relation to the CGR’s detailed above. Members are requested to take account of the statutory criteria as set out at section 6 of this report in consideration of these draft recommendations.
7.2 Once approved, the final outcome of the CGR will be implemented ahead of the 2027 parish council elections. This means that new parish council areas (if any), changes to parish council areas (if any), changes in the number of parish councillors (if any), and any resulting changes in council tax arrangements for households all change at that time. Ahead of those changes, a review of polling districts and polling places will be carried out, to take account of changes to electoral areas.
7.3 There were some examples of concerns raised during the CGR relating to the performance of some, not all, parish councils. These matters fall outside the remit of the CGR and could be appropriately addressed by the parish councils seeking governance advice and training and/or the electorate at future parish council elections through the democratic process.
8.0 Financial Implications
8.1 There is a financial cost in conducting any CGR, both in terms of officer support and in respect of the consultation process. Once instigated, the CGR must be conducted within a one-year period.
8.2 The staffing support costs for this CGR have been absorbed within existing capacity in the electoral, democratic, GIS, communication, consultation and legal services teams.
8.3 Consultation documents were made available online, however some printing
and posting was required where residents requested a paper copy of the consultation to complete and return. There were 34 requests for paper copies of the Stage 1 consultation and 80 requests for paper copies of the Stage 2 consultation. This incurred a cost of approx. £0.92 per request.
8.4 The cost of parish elections is incurred by the council but is recharged to the parishes where a contested election is held. Any changes to the boundaries may affect the parish precept that residents affected by a boundary change will pay. Any changes to precepts and council tax bills would be applied from the date the adopted recommendations from the review become effective.
8.5 The total consultation cost is approx. £15,335 which consisted of printing, postage and digital marketing.
8.6 As the Council has already written to all relevant parish councils, households, the Yorkshire Association of Local Councils, and the MP’s covering the areas under review providing direction to the timetable for review and where further information on the Council’s website is available, it is anticipated that the consultation has been promoted, advertised and marketed as much as is possible.
8.7 To anticipate the precept for a new parish council, the prospective billing authority must formally state the budget requirement (which equals the precept amount) in the reorganisation order that establishes the council.
9.0 Legal Implications
9.1 In order to amend any of the governance arrangements as set out below:
· the creation, merger, alteration or abolition of parishes
· the naming of parishes and the style of new parishes
· the electoral arrangements for parishes, such as the ordinary year of election, council size, wards, and numbers of councillors
· the grouping or de-grouping of parishes
a community governance review must take place, including consultation with the public and other stakeholders.
9.2 In undertaking the CGR, the council will comply with the requirements of Part 4 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 and other relevant legislation and have regard to Guidance on Community Governance Reviews issued in accordance with section 100(4) of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 by the Department of Communities and Local Government and the Local Government Boundary Commission for England in March 2010.
9.3 References in legislation to a ‘parish’ also include a parish which has an alternative style (such as ‘town’, ‘village’ or ‘community’ council) and parish meetings.
10.0 ClimateChange Implications
10.1 The Climate Change Impact assessment is at appendix 15.
11.0 Equalities Implications
11.1 Every property in the areas under review were sent an explanatory letter in the post initially at stage 1. Residents were offered the option to request a paper copy of the survey if they were not able to complete the survey online. A QR code was included for ease of completion, as well as directions to complete the review online. An FAQ page was also created to help the public with any queries or questions.
The Equalities Impact Assessment is at appendix 16.
12.0 Reasonsfor Recommendations
12.1 Final recommendations should be prepared following the receipt and consideration of all of the responses over the 2 consultation periods of the CGR. These final recommendations should be adopted by the principal council as the basis for the final outcome of the CGR.
13.0 Alternative Options
13.1 Council could choose to amend the recommendations or to not proceed with any recommendations and to cease the CGR. This would end the CGR process.
13.2 If the CGR were not to progress further the electoral arrangements would remain as present.
13.3 In considering all the options, the recommendations at 14.0 are recommended for approval.
|
14.0 |
Recommendations
|
|
14.1 |
That the recommendation from Standards and Governance Committee on 30 June 2026 to accept the results from the 2025/26 CGR Stage 2 final consultation process be noted.
|
|
14.2 |
That the final recommendations as set out in Appendices 1-14 of the report be agreed and publicised as the final outcome of the 2025/26 CGR. |
Jennifer Norton – Assistant Director, Legal and Deputy Monitoring Officer
02 July 2026
Report Authors
Christine Phillipson, Principal Democratic Services Officer
Harriet Clarke, Senior Democratic Services Officer
Ben Nattrass, Elections Manager
Background Documents:
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act (Part4)
Guidance on Community Governance Reviews
Minutes from Full Council on 16 July 2025 (Minute 215)
Minutes from Full Council on 18 March 2026 (Minute 268)
Appendices 1-14 - Analysis and Final Recommendations
Annexes 1-14A - Consultation Surveys
Annexes 1-14B - Summary of Consultation Responses
1) Barden
2) Bolton-on-Swale
3) Rand Grange
4) Spennithorne
5) Thornthwaite with Padside
6) Kirby Hill and District
7) Newall with Clifton
8) Thorpe Willoughby
9) Constable Burton and Finghall
10) Hudswell and District
11) Kirklington with Sutton Howgrave
12) Thornton-le-Beans
13) Escrick
14) Sherburn
Appendix 15 CCIA
Appendix 16 EIA