Corporate Scrutiny Committee

6 July 2026

 

Report of Director of Governance and Monitoring Officer

 

City of York Council Boundary Commission – Phase 2 Ward Boundaries Council Submission

 

Summary

 

1.           This Submission document has been developed in response to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England’s (LGBCE) Electoral Review of the Council size (number of elected Councillors) and the number of wards and ward boundaries in York.

 

2.           The LGBCE Review will be undertaken in two distinct phases: Phase one, Council Size; Phase two, Ward Boundaries. At the Extraordinary meeting of Council held on 16 October 2025, Council agreed to submit a response to the LGBCE in respect of Phase one.  This document comprises the Council submission in respect of Phase two of the process.

 

Recommendations

 

3.           The Boundary Commission Task and Finish Group welcomed the work undertaken by the LGBCE and considered the proposals in order to establish whether there was ‘common ground’ in respect of some or all of the proposals which would facilitate the submission of an agreed response from Council.

 

4.           As a result of the Boundary Commission Task and Finish Group’s considerations, the Committee is recommended to endorse this Report, in its present form, to Council for consideration and decision, as the following represents the agreed position of all the groups present at the Boundary Commission Task and Finish Group:

·                    The Council expresses its disappointment that the Local Government Boundary Commission England proposals resulted in an even number of Councillors, but in light of the major changes required to a wide variety of wards which a decision to resile from the recommended number would cause, the Council does not consider that the proposals should be reconsidered.

·                    The Dunnington Ward (including Dunnington, Holtby, Kexby and Scoreby Parishes and part of Murton Parish) to be maintained as a standalone ward rather than being included within the Derwent ward.

·                    The Wheldrake Ward (including Wheldrake, Elvington, Deighton and Narburn Parishes) to be maintained as a standalone ward rather than being included within the Derwent ward.

·                    Derwenthorpe is a recognisable single community and should not be split up in the way the Commission proposed. Tang Hall and the entirety of Derwenthorpe should together form a separate two-member ward.

·                    Osbaldwick Ward should include the southwestern part of Murton Parish, up to the Osbaldwick Link Road, including the area incorporating Tranby Avenue and Redbarn Drive labelled “A” on the LGBCE Proposals Map.

Background:

 

5.           The LGBCE last conducted a review of the CYC boundaries in 2014, this electoral review is being carried out to ensure that:

·                    The wards in York are in the best possible places to help the Council carry out its responsibilities effectively.

·                    The number of electors represented by each councillor is approximately the same across the city.

 

6.           The proposals for York:

·                    York should be represented by 48 Councillors, one more than there is now.

·                    York should have 22 wards, one more than there is now.

·                    The boundaries of most wards should change; three will stay the same.

 

7.           The LGBCE recommendations are based not only how many electors there are now, but also on how many there are likely to be in the five years after the publication of the final recommendations. The LCBCE must also try to recommend strong, clearly identifiable boundaries for wards. In reality, they are unlikely to be able to create wards with exactly the same number of electors in each; they must therefore be flexible. However, the LGBCE will try to keep the number of electors represented by each Councillor as close to the average for the Council as possible.

 

8.           The LGBCE worked out the average number of electors per councillor by dividing the electorate by the number of Councillors, as shown on the table below.

 

 

2025

2031

Electorate of York

156,099

170,031

Number of Councillors

47

48

Average Number of Electors per Councillor

3,252

3,542

 

9.           All of the proposed wards for York are forecast to have good electoral equality by 2031.

 

10.        The LGBCE recommends 10 three-councillor wards, six two-councillor wards and six one-councillor wards. A summary of the new wards can be found here: https://www.lgbce.org.uk/sites/default/files/202604/york_draft_recommendations_report.pdf

 

11.        The LGBCE published these recommendations on 28th April 2026 for consultation, the consultation will run until 6th July 2026. 

 

Boundary Commission Task and Finish Group

 

12.        The Boundary Commission Task and Finish Group met on two occasions to consider the proposed warding patterns. The Group largely retained the same membership as of Phase one of the proposals: Councillors Coles, Hollyer, Merrett (Chair), Nicholls (replacing Cllr. Steward) and Wann.

 

13.        Members of the Group welcomed the work undertaken by the Boundary Commission, however expressed their disappointment that the proposals resulted in an even number of Councillors, notwithstanding the previously agreed position of Council that, irrespective of the actual number, York should have an odd number of Councillors. However, the Task and Group also agreed that suggesting a variation to the proposed 48 Councillors at this stage in the process would result in major changes to a wide variety of wards, and the Group did not therefore support the reconsideration of this proposal.

 

14.        There was broad support among Members for Dunnington (including Dunnington, Holtby, Kexby and Scoreby Parishes and part of Murton Parish) to be maintained as a standalone ward rather than being included within the Derwent area.

 

15.        There was broad support among Members for Wheldrake (including Wheldrake, Elvington, Deighton and Narburn Parishes) to be maintained as a standalone ward rather than being included within the Derwent area.

 

16.        Whilst there was agreement that Tang Hall and the entirety of Derwenthorpe should form a separate two-member ward, no agreed proposals were put forward to deal with the resulting implications for the boundaries of Heworth and Heworth Without.

 

a.           At the first meeting, Members of the Liberal Democrat Group presented a proposal for discussion (Appendix 1). Labour indicated they would prefer a lesser degree of change in the Stockton Lane area, which was historically part of the City / Monk Ward but would reflect on the Liberal Democrat proposal. The Conservatives commented that would like to see greater reflection of the Heworth Without Ward and too would consider the Liberal Democrat suggestion.  

b.           At the subsequent meeting, Members of the Labour Group proposed an alternative, smaller-scale scheme for consideration, focused on the northern section of the Stockton Lane, which included the houses situated within the Greenfield Park Drive block of streets, transferring into the Heworth Without Ward. (Appendix 2)

 

17.        There was agreement that the southwestern area of Murton Parish, up to the Osbaldwick Link Road, and incorporating Tranby Avenue and Redbarn Drive, should be included within a single-member Osbaldwick Ward.

 

18.        Finally, Members expressed concerns that some of the proposed ward names were not particularly user-friendly; however, no consensus was reached on alternative names.

 

 

Options

 

19.        Notwithstanding consideration by this Committee, the Council is not obliged to make a joint submission to the LGBCE, but such a joint submission would undoubtedly assist the LGBCE in its deliberations. The work of the Task and Finish Group was intended to explore whether such a joint submission was possible.  In light of this, Council has the following options:

a.           Council may choose not to submit such a cross-party submission; or

b.           Council may choose to submit an agreed submission to the LGBCE’s Warding Pattern consultation.

 

20.        In the event that Council chooses to submit an agreed submission, Council may choose:

a.           to submit this Report to the LGBCE in its present form, as a submission from all Members of the Council; or

b.           to submit this Report, subject to such amendments as Council may agree, as a submission from all Members of the Council.

 

Analysis

 

21.        Interested parties and political groups may submit their own representations to the LGBCE. Members are asked to consider whether there is merit in submitting a Council-wide response on those matters where consensus has been reached. The LGBCE has extended the deadline for a Council submission to allow for consideration of this issue at Full Council on 16 July 2027.

 

Council Plan

 

22.        Councillors are integral to the delivery of the Council Plan, details of which are included in the main body of the Report.

 

Implications

 

23.        The implications of the report are as follows:

 

·        Financial: There will be increased costs associated with any increase in the number of Councillors, e.g., for additional allowance payments. The current level of basic allowance paid to all Councillors is £11,757.

 

·        Human Resources (HR): There are no human resource implications at this stage of the Boundary Commission submission process.

 

·        Equalities: There are no equalities implications at this stage of the Boundary Commission submission process.

 

·        Legal: The Council Size issue was the first element of the LGBCE’s Electoral Review to be determined, following representations from the Council which were agreed at its Meeting of 16 October 2025. The LGBCE then made a preliminary determination on the size, after which consultations began in relation to the Warding Pattern to be adopted; these consultations consisted of an initial phase of inviting representations, followed by the current, second, phase to consider the LGBCE’s initial recommendations, after which the LGBCE will make its final determination. Once that determination is reached, an Order will be laid before Parliament for adoption, and the new wards and Council Size will be implemented in time for the 2027 whole Council elections.

 

·                    Crime and Disorder: There are no crime and disorder implications at this stage of the Boundary Commission submission process.

 

·                    Information Technology (IT): There are no IT implications at this stage of the Boundary Commission submission process.

 

·                    Property: There are no property implications at this stage of the Boundary Commission submission process.

 

Risk Management

 

24.        A full risk assessment will be undertaken once the work of the Boundary Commission has been completed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Report Contact Details

 

Chief Officer Name

Bryn Roberts

Job Title

Director of Governance and Monitoring Officer

Service Area

Governance

Report Approved

Yes

Date

24.6.2026

Report author

Julie Gallagher

Job Title

Head of Democratic Services

 

Wards Affected: 

All

x

 

 

 

For further information please contact the author of the report

 

 

Appendix 1 – Liberal Democrat Group Proposals

Appendix 2 – Labour Group Proposals

 

Background Papers:

 

Phase one Submission Report:

https://democracy.york.gov.uk/documents/s185887/Cover%20report%201.pdf