REVIEW OF COMMUNITY REVIEW OF COMMUNITY BOUNDARIES IN THE COUNTY OF THE ISLE OF ANGLESEY

DRAFT PROPOSALS

APPENDIX C

Summary of Representations Received Prior to Draft Proposals

HOLYHEAD / TREARDDUR / RHOSCOLYN

Holyhead Town Council - proposed that their boundary should be increased to cover Holy Island which would include the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn. They considered that they were well placed to take on the additional responsibilities of such an increased area as they were currently taking steps to improve the services provided to their existing community area. They suggested that, as a minimum, their area should be increased to include the new retail park in Penrhos and the Ty Mawr development.

They also proposed that their existing number of members should be reduced from 21 to 14, leaving two members for each of the seven electoral wards within their community as they considered that this would be sufficient representation to cover their existing area.

In a further representation the Council proposed that, if the Ty Mawr development be included within their Community, then the boundary in that area should be realigned to follow the UDP Allocation Boundary as this would ensure that any future development in the area would still fall within their Council's boundary. They also requested that consideration be given to transferring the Anglesey Aluminium Metals site into their Community as this would ensure that all major industrial sites currently bordering Holyhead Town would be within their Community.

Rhoscolyn Community Council - opposed to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead for the following reasons:

Holyhead is urban whilst Rhoscolyn is rural and therefore the needs of both are vastly different;
The existing councillors of each community are best suited to deal with the differing needs and issues of their respective areas;
Local links and relationships are important in a rural area such as Rhoscolyn and therefore residents would be dissatisfied with being represented by Holyhead Town Council;
The size of representation for Rhoscolyn would be significantly reduced by the proposed amalgamation;
The precept for Rhoscolyn residents would be increased, particularly if the payment of community councillors was introduced as intended by Holyhead Town Council;
Rhoscolyn is a primarily Welsh speaking community whilst Holyhead is largely English speaking. An amalgamation of these areas could be detrimental to the use of the Welsh language in that area of Anglesey;
Holy Island can only be considered a unit in a geographical sense because there were major difference between the rural and urban areas. Additionally, amalgamating the areas to create a larger community council would run contrary to the prevailing trend for smaller authority units.

The Council also submitted the following petition:

Holyhead Town Council's Attempt To Change Local Government Boundaries

We the undersigned oppose Holyhead Town Council's wish to control Holy Island and deprive Rhoscolyn and Trearddur Councils of their independence

89 signatures

Trearddur Community Council - opposed to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead for the following reasons:

The merger would offer little to the advantage of Trearddur residents;
Trearddur is a large semi-rural community with an economy based mainly on tourism whilst Holyhead is a small urban area with all the advantages and disadvantages of a working port. They are, therefore, very different communities which can be best served by separate community councils;
An amalgamation with another community could damage public perception of Trearddur and thereby damage its tourist industry;
The Community of Trearddur has been well served in the past by its council members who represent a wide variety of interests and experiences within the community;
An amalgamation of councils would merely produce an enhancement to the income of an enlarged Holyhead whilst Trearddur would receive less benefit from a higher precept. There is no evidence that larger community councils have greater economic efficiency and Trearddur residents could suffer financially for very little benefit.

Ieuan Wyn Jones AM - opposed the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He considered such an amalgamation should require the unanimous agreement of all three community councils.

Mark Isherwood AM - wrote in support of concerns raised regarding the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead.

Cllr. P J Dunning (Trearddur Electoral Division)- objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He considered that it held no benefits for the residents of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn either politically or economically and pointed out that the lower populations of these communities compared with Holyhead would mean that they would only have a small representation as part of an amalgamated community council. The existing community councils for Trearddur and Rhoscolyn were carrying out their duties effectively and economically in partnership with the County Council. He pointed out that the three communities were different in character from each other, Rhoscolyn was rural with a strong Welsh language history, Trearddur was rural with strong links to tourism whilst Holyhead was an urban port oriented community. He considered that the existing membership of Trearddur Community Council had the necessary expertise to effectively administer their community both currently and in future and had formed good relationships with the various agencies and local businesses in Anglesey and had maintained reasonable precepts charged to residents.

He also suggested that, if any amalgamation was necessary, it would make more sense to merge Trearddur and Rhoscolyn communities which would then mirror the County Council electoral division boundary.

A resident of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. She considered that Trearddur Community Council was very efficient and worked well for the village. She considered that Holyhead Town Council would not be able to cope with an increased area and would not be able to provide adequate services and that the proposal was being put forward for financial reasons.

Two residents of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. They considered that such a move would only increase the cost of local government and distance residents of Trearddur Bay and Rhoscolyn from having any real say in the future of their area. They could see no advantage in the proposal since they were well served by Trearddur Community Council.

A resident of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. She considered that Trearddur and Rhoscolyn were rural areas whilst Holyhead was an urban area and that there was no local support for the proposal. There was no indication that the services provided to Trearddur and Rhoscolyn by Holyhead Town Council would be any improvement on the existing services.

A resident of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He considered that the rural areas of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn were very different to the urban area of Holyhead and that no advantage to the proposal had been given. He stated that he was satisfied with the existing community council representation.

A resident of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He did not consider that the affairs of Holyhead were being well managed nor that the community affairs of Trearddur would be improved by joining Holyhead particularly with a council reduced to 14 members. He pointed out that Trearddur was a rural tourist area with different needs to urban Holyhead. He said that Trearddur Community Councillors had looked after the needs of their area well and efficiently in the past.

A resident of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He considered that the needs of Trearddur and Holyhead were completely different in terms of housing employment and welfare. He pointed out that the areas had no real affinity with each other as Trearddur Bay was a holiday destination whilst Holyhead was more concerned with the Irish ferry traffic. He also considered that the community affairs of Holyhead were not being well managed and that there was strong local opposition to the proposed merger.

Two residents of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. They considered that the problems affecting the mainly urban Holyhead were different from those of rural Trearddur and Rhoscolyn which would lose out. The proposed merger would have a detrimental effect for the residents of Trearddur Bay.

A resident of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. She considered that community councils of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn dealt with the concerns of their residents. She stated that she could see only disadvantages in the proposed merger with Holyhead as direct interest in Trearddur and Rhoscolyn would be lost.

Two residents of Trearddur Bay - considered that any change in administration should be in the interests of the local ratepayer.

A resident of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. She considered that Holyhead Town was urban with a fluctuating economy dependant on their port whereas Trearddur and Rhoscolyn were rural councils with a tradition of steady economy and grass roots councillors. Trearddur Community Council have a good understanding of the economic and tourist requirements of their area and future developments such as Ty Mawr. When Holyhead Council had extended their boundaries in the past the areas taken over had suffered from higher rates and lack of facilities.

A resident of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He stated that Holyhead was a sea port town which had problems similar to those found in inner cities and considered that this made it unsuitable to take responsibility for running the rural communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with their ageing populations. He considered that Holyhead Town Council were experiencing problems in addressing their own problems without adding the rural needs of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn to them.

A resident of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He considered that Holyhead, as a seaport and industrial town, was entirely different from Trearddur and Rhoscolyn. Both Trearddur and Rhoscolyn were predominantly rural areas, Rhoscolyn with a strong Welsh language heritage and Trearddur Bay with a long history of tourism. All three areas had very different needs and each should be represented by separate community councils. He considered that both Trearddur and Rhoscolyn Community Councils had served their areas well in the past.

Two residents of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. They considered that the environmental, economic and social issues of Rhoscolyn, Four Mile Bridge and Trearddur Bay were very different to those of Holyhead and that these areas were better served by the existing community councils who understood the needs of each area.

Two residents of Trearddur Bay - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. They considered that Rhoscolyn in particular had its own distinct identity and council which was active in representing the needs and views of local residents and pointed out that this would be lost if the proposed change were adopted.

A resident of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Rhoscolyn with any larger area. She considered that Rhoscolyn had its own unique requirements which should be managed locally and that being amalgamated with another area could lead to inappropriate policies being imposed.

A resident of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Rhoscolyn with Holyhead. She considered that issues concerning Rhoscolyn were very different to those affecting Holyhead

Two residents of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Rhoscolyn / Four Mile Bridge with the Community of Holyhead. They considered that the two areas had very distinct differences in interests as Rhoscolyn was rural whilst Holyhead was a built up urban area and did not believe that Holyhead Town Council was equipped to represent the interests of Rhoscolyn residents. The current Rhoscolyn Community Council comprised local councillors who had a good knowledge of local issues and had the confidence of residents that they would properly represent them and could not be bettered by Holyhead Town Council. They said that there was no evidence that centralisation of the kind proposed for Holy Island was beneficial to local communities. They considered that amalgamation with Holyhead could also mean a rise in community charges.

A resident of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He considered that the existing arrangements for Rhoscolyn worked very well as the councillors knew the community well and understood its needs. He believed that this would be lost should the proposed amalgamation take place.

Two residents of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. They considered that the needs of each of the communities were best served by their existing community councils who understood the individual needs of the areas they were responsible for.

Two residents of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Rhoscolyn with Holyhead. They considered that there was a marked difference of interests between the urban area of Holyhead and the rural area of Rhoscolyn and did not believe that Holyhead Town Council was equipped to represent their interests. They pointed out that their community councillors in Rhoscolyn had a knowledge of local issues and needs which meant that they could properly represent the residents. They did not consider that the centralisation being proposed by Holyhead Town Council would be successful and would only result in higher community charges.

A Family of residents of Rhoscolyn / Wirral - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. They considered that Rhoscolyn Community Council had delivered satisfactory governance of the local community in the past with the minimum cost effective resource. They pointed out that there was a marked difference between the interests of urban Holyhead and rural Rhoscolyn and did not believe that Holyhead Town Council was equipped to represent the interests of Rhoscolyn residents. The current Rhoscolyn Community Council comprised local councillors who had a good knowledge of local issues and had the confidence of residents that they would properly represent them and could not be bettered by Holyhead Town Council. They said that there was no evidence that centralisation of the kind proposed for Holy Island was beneficial to local communities. They considered that amalgamation with Holyhead could also mean a rise in community charges.

A resident of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He considered that Rhoscolyn Community Council comprised representatives whose knowledge and background matched the rural, costal community which they served. The proposal would amalgamate widely diverse areas with different conditions and needs and the significant difference in population density would result in representation for the lightly populated Rhoscolyn being adversely affected. He said that Holyhead had a much larger community precept than Rhoscolyn and that an amalgamation would result in increased costs for Rhoscolyn residents with no resulting benefit.

A resident of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He pointed out that the governments white paper on communities proposed that existing community councils should not be abolished against the wishes of the local people. He considered that the interests of Rhoscolyn and its residents would not be properly represented by a council dominated by the busy ferry port and a significant part of Anglesey's manufacturing industry and could see no advantage of a rural area being governed by a town dominated council. He said that Rhoscolyn should not be merged with any other community.

A resident of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. She considered that the economy and society of the areas differed in many significant aspects and the councillors of each area had different expertise, knowledge and duties. She said that the present Rhoscolyn councillors had extensive knowledge of the area and local concerns and could be easily contacted by residents. She pointed out that Rhoscolyn council was conducted entirely in Welsh demonstrating the continuity of heritage and language. She pointed out that the governments white paper on communities proposed that existing community councils should not be abolished against the wishes of the local people.

Two residents of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. They considered that Rhoscolyn had its own unique social, work and geographical characteristics which were very different to those of Holyhead. The Rhoscolyn councillors were local to the area and had an intimate knowledge of local issues and they did not believe Holyhead Town Council could better this or were equipped to represent the interests of Rhoscolyn. They considered that the merger could result in Rhoscolyn residents paying more for a reduced level of representation.

A resident of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead or any other area. She considered that the needs of each area were different and that the infrastructure of a town would be inappropriate for a rural seaside village. The existing Rhoscolyn councillors were local to the area and understood the needs of the community. She pointed out that the governments white paper on communities proposed that existing community councils should not be abolished against the wishes of the local people.

Two residents of Wirral - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. They considered that the two communities were completely different and that Rhoscolyn had requirements which would not apply to a large urban area like Holyhead. They pointed out that Rhoscolyn councillors had a broad range of skills, interests and knowledge of local issues which enabled them to represent the community effectively and considered that this level of representation would be lost if there was an amalgamation. They considered that merger with Holyhead would mean increased community charges without any benefit to Rhoscolyn residents and pointed out that the governments white paper on communities proposed that existing community councils should not be abolished against the wishes of the local people.

A resident of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Community of Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He considered that the areas were very different with their own diverse and even opposing interests and unique social and geographical characteristics. The existing Rhoscolyn councillors were local to the area and understood the rural and local issues which were important to the community. To amalgamate them would leave Rhoscolyn without any significant independent political, social force or representation. He pointed out that the governments white paper on communities proposed that existing community councils should have a greater say within county councils and therefore it would make no sense to amalgamate Rhoscolyn with Holyhead.

A resident of Rhoscolyn - objected to the proposal to amalgamate the Communities of Trearddur and Rhoscolyn with the Community of Holyhead. He considered that the existing community councils were well acquainted with local issues and concerns and had therefore represented the areas well. He pointed out that the proposal seemed at odds with the government's white paper on communities which proposed that existing community councils should not be abolished against the wishes of the local people. He considered that Holyhead Town Council's motives were financial and would not improve efficiency or representation for the communities they wished to absorb.

All or some of the following reasons were put forward for opposing the amalgamation of the Communities of Trearddur, Rhoscolyn and Holyhead by 5 residents of Rhoscolyn:

Trearddur Bay, Rhoscolyn and Holyhead are three very, very different societies, each with its own interests and each has its own unique social, work and geographical characteristics. The effect of the proposal would be to make Rhoscolyn an adjunct of Holyhead without any significant independent, political, social force or representation. That would be a retrograde step and cause huge resentment in a group of the population that care for the particular local society in which they live or have houses.
Rhoscolyn Council is made up of eight local Councillors representing special local issues and have an understanding of residents values and needs and the resident's representatives to Anglesey County Council. A smaller number of representatives based in Holyhead would disenfranchise the views of residents and a 'Holyhead' local council would not be equipped to represent their interests.
The communities are dissimilar and their interests can be quite different, and even opposed, so a merger doesn't make sense. Rhoscolyn has its own unique requirements that should continue to be identified and managed locally and anything which dilutes this or produces unnecessary red-tape or imposes inappropriate policies on this area of outstanding natural beauty must be avoided at all costs.
This difference between rural and urban interest notwithstanding, the present council representatives of Rhoscolyn have a broad range of skills and interests which include the professions, education, business and agriculture. If there were fewer and subsumed into Holyhead this would be lost.
The proposed change might affect residents financially if Rhoscolyn loses its own precept into an overall Holyhead budget, as there is clearly the potential of the council tax being adversely affected whereby Rhoscolyn ends up with a disproportionably higher tax to the benefit of Holyhead. Rhoscolyn residents might end up paying more for less on their local issues.
Such centralisation as is being proposed by Holyhead has been proved to be unsuccessful in many cases. A most pertinent one being the move some years ago to merge Anglesey with Gwynedd, a move which proved to be unpopular and unsuccessful when it was subsequently rescinded.
It is proposed to give the community/parish councils a greater direct say within the Isle of Anglesey County Council and to this end it would make no sense to amalgamate Rhoscolyn into Holyhead in an attempt to swim against the tide of the White Paper proposal on this very subject.
The government's white paper on communities proposed that existing community councils should not be abolished against the wishes of the local people.

MENAI BRIDGE / CWM CADNANT / PENMYNYDD

Cwm Cadnant Community Council - considered that the boundary to their community should be realigned to include part of the Community of Penmynydd in the vicinity of the B5420 Penmynydd road junction leading to the Penhesgyn Waste Site as a tidy up exercise. The Council pointed out that planning applications for the site came under their jurisdiction whilst some properties on the road leading to the site were located in Pemynydd. They also considered that the boundary between their community and the Community of Menai Bridge be realigned to take in properties in the vicinity located along the single track road opposite Pentraeth Garage also as a tidy up exercise as planning applications received by the Council were located closer to Menai Bridge than at least half a dozen other properties in the vicinity.

Menai Bridge Town Council - objected to the change to the boundary between their community and Cwm Cadnant proposed by Cwm Cadnant Community Council as they considered that it would lead to confusion and misinterpretation of the traditional boundary. Due to the specific nature of Menai Bridge as the gateway to Anglesey they considered that the existing boundary should remain unchanged.

Penmynydd and Star Community Council - objected to the change to the boundary between their community and Cwm Cadnant proposed by Cwm Cadnant Community Council. They considered that the area involved was historically part of Penmynydd and that it was more convenient for residents to meet and vote in Penmynydd.

Ieuan Wyn Jones AM - objected to the proposed changes to the boundaries between the communities of Menai Bridge, Penmynydd and Cwm Cadnant as these proposals did not have the support of all the parties involved.

A resident of Gaerwen - objected to the change to the boundary between Penmynydd and Cwm Cadnant proposed by Cwm Cadnant Community Council. He considered that it was more convenient for the residents of the affected area to meet and vote in Penmynydd.

PENTRAETH / LLANFAIR MATHAFARN EITHAF / LLANDDYFNAN

Pentraeth Community Council - proposed that their north western boundary be extended to take in part of the Community of Llanfair Mathafarn Eithaf in the vicinity of Rhôs y Gâd and part of the Community of Llanddyfnan in the vicinity of Tyn-y-pwll. They considered that their proposed realignment of the boundary would straighten the community boundary line and strengthen Pentraeth in terms of size and population. It would also increase the rateable value of Pentraeth without affecting the community of Llanfair Mathafarn Eithaf. They pointed out that the area proposed for transfer already came under the Pentraeth address and post code.

Llanfair Mathafarn Eithaf Community Council - objected to the change to the boundary between their community and Pentraeth proposed by Pentraeth Community Council for the following reasons:

If the object of the change is to straighten the boundary of Pentraeth then it should be applied to all of Pentraeth's community boundaries and not just the area subject to the proposal;
They considered that the proposed change did not effectively straighten the community boundary as was the claimed intention as there was a more straightforward boundary which would serve this purpose, which they indicated on an enclosed map (although it was not their intention to propose a change to the existing boundary). They therefore considered that the proposal was an attempt to increase the area of Pentraeth Community;
The proposed change would be at the expense of Llanfair Mathafarn Eithaf Community which would be weakened as a result. Pentraeth Community Council state that the recent development in the area proposed for transfer into their community would increase their rateable value and therefore it follows that it would decrease the rateable value of Llanfair Mathafarn Eithaf Community;
They did not accept that there had been substantial development in the area of the proposed change since 1983;
The point made by Pentraeth Community Council that all the properties in the area included in the proposal fell within the LL75 post code and had Pentraeth as a postal address. This ignored the fact that postcodes bore no relationship to community boundaries and seemed to imply that any area falling within the LL75 postcode should form part of Pentraeth Community. They pointed out that there were other areas falling within the LL75 postcode, such as Red Wharf Bay, which had Pentraeth as their postal address that were clearly not in Pentraeth;
In respect of Pentraeth Community Council's point that some residents of the area included in the proposal believed that their polling station was in Pentraeth, they pointed out that it was not uncommon in all areas for some electors to make such a mistake despite the address of the correct polling station being printed on the polling card.

Llanddyfnan Community Council - objected to the change to the boundary between their community and Pentraeth proposed by Pentraeth Community Council as they considered that the existing arrangements worked well in that area. The Council also considered that the boundary of their community should be altered to include the areas of Rhosmeirch and Marianglas.

Cllr. W J Williams (Llanddyfnan Electoral Division) - objected to the change to the boundary between Llanddyfnan and Pentraeth proposed by Pentraeth Community Council. He pointed out that the existing boundary was geographical in nature and well known to local residents. He considered that there had been no development in the area which would warrant a change to the boundary.

CWM CADNANT / PENTRAETH

Cwm Cadnant Community Council - considered that the boundary between their community and the Community of Pentraeth in the area of the junction of Black Horse Lane and the A5025 should be realigned as a tidy up exercise as it would include properties of which similar planning applications had been received by their council.

Pentraeth Community Council - objected to the proposal by Cwm Cadnant Community Council to change the community boundary in the vicinity of Black Horse Lane.