Last Wednesday, I continued describing my three functions model for community development, with a second post about representation:
- Representation
- Planning
- Delivery
This is the third of three posts about representation:
- Provide a meeting place
- Generate and record deep conversations
- Agree a community plan
The Maltby Community Plan
Community planning in Rotherham started after the 2000 Local Government Act, which set up Area Assemblies (the name of these varied from place to place – does anywhere still have them?) and directed all Local Authorities to prepare a community plan for their borough. This was to be used by the Local Strategic Partnership to govern planning across the Local Authority area. (If you think calling a borough-wide plan a community plan is misleading, I agree!)
In Rotherham, the Local Authority decided to base their community plan on local plans and they identified 60 distinct communities within the borough. I’ve no idea whether they actually achieved this but full marks for ambition.
The Local Authority plan and the local plans were different types of document. The former had authority and set the framework for local partnerships. The local plans expressed as far as possible a local consensus for developments in their neighbourhood. The Local Authority decided what to include from the local plans in its borough plan. Residents could still work from their own plans at partnership meetings.
The Maltby By-Pass
Shops in High Street, Maltby (during a quiet period!) (David Martin) / CC BY-SA 2.0
I developed the first of Rotherham’s local plans (this is what most people would call a community plan) in a small market town called Maltby. One incident illustrates the confusion between local and borough plans. I circulated a draft local plan, which included a well-argued case for a by-pass to take heavy traffic off the town’s high street.
An irate phone call, from the Council’s Highways Department, complained they had not agreed a by-pass for Maltby. They were annoyed because the chapter was well argued and they wanted to know who had written it. I was reluctant to tell them the author was the owner of a chip shop on the high street!
Highways had misunderstood the purpose of the local plan. It would be filleted by the local authority to contribute to their borough plan at a later stage. The plan expressed the consensus of the local people and it is relevant to know they want a by-pass and why they want it. How the strategic partnership might respond to their plan is another matter entirely.
The Power of the Community Plan
It is equally important for local people to understand the status of their plan. No external organisation can be bound by what amounts to a sophisticated wish list. The power of the local plan is in the extent to which it represents the views of residents. If local people meet and discuss the issues that affect their community then their local plan carries more weight with partners. I estimated we consulted with at least 400 people to prepare the plan. Out of a 10 000 population, do you think that is a credible sample? We could show it was a diverse group of people.
Without a plan it is hard for local representatives to make a credible case to potential partners. It provides a mandate for community activists but it has no authority for anyone else. As such a community plan is essential for residents if they want a say in local planning. The next post will explore negotiation of local plans.
Leave a comment if you have prepared a community plan. How do you use it?
