In safe hands: neighbourhood management governance, Bournemouth

Balancing act - who sits on the board

Agreement on the constitution of the board preceded Sue Bickler's appointment as neighbourhood manager. 'There were two key principles for the make-up of the board,' she says. 'One was having a resident majority and the other was the need to involve all the major stakeholders. A big factor was that resident members should stand as individuals, not as representatives of residents associations or single interest campaign groups.

'They might be a member of one of these groups but there was a real concern that they should not stand in that capacity.' The idea was to ensure that the board would be able to make impartial judgements, a position difficult to achieve if one or more members were motivated by single issues. 'There are plenty of people who care about the area but haven't joined any committees - this gave everyone a chance to stand for the board.'

The overall thinking behind the project's approach to governance can be summarised as:

• resident board members should be elected to add legitimacy to the whole project
• they should represent the interests of the wider community rather than a single interest or narrow cluster of properties
• there should be a resident majority built in to the board - to be quorate also requires resident majority
• co-options can be used to fill gaps where interest groups/excluded groups are otherwise not represented.

Countdown to board elections

Dee Henderson, elected resident board member: 'I was delighted by the turnout. I know a lot of people in Springbourne but not 700!'

The decision to make resident board members stand for election was controversial, an understandable view given that they give their time and energy voluntarily.

So far, just four of the eight seats have been contested, with only one former board member refusing to participate. Board members Dee Henderson and Harry Cutler were among the first to stand for election. Henderson says her initial reaction was: 'I'm giving up my time freely - why should I have to go through this?'.

But ultimately, she found it a fairly painless process. She was also elated by the numbers she polled. 'I know a lot of people in Springbourne but not 700!' As a Bournemouth councillor with a long and distinguished track record, Cutler had fewer qualms about standing. 'I just put down my council experience,' he says, 'And of course I'm a lifelong resident - they had my history in the Echo the other week.'

Each candidate was asked to set out their case in a printed statement circulated with the ballot papers. 'We had 200 words to say what our policies were and who we were,' says Henderson. To her relief, there was no canvassing involved - no public debates, kissing strangers' babies or knocking on doors.

Harry Cutler, board member and councillor: 'The most any of the 11 of us fighting in the council elections got was 600 - one resident rep got 955 to join the neighbourhood management board!'

The response to the postal ballot, says Cutler, was phenomenal. From an electorate in which just 29% had 'heard' of neighbourhood management nine months earlier, he says: 'It averaged 25% across the area and that's more than voted in the council elections six months earlier. One lady polled more votes in Boscombe West than any of us who put up for the council. The most any of the 11 of us fighting in the council elections got was 600 - she got 955.'

Harry Cutler, board member and councillor: 'The most any of the 11 of us fighting in the council elections got was 600 - one resident rep got 955 to join the neighbourhood management board!'

Organising the first round elections was a demanding process. 'We started planning it in June,' says Sue Bickler. In August, the neighbourhood management project called for nominations. The ballot papers along with the candidates' election statements went out in October and the votes were counted in November. But between that, there was a mountain of tasks.

One of these was getting a list of voters' addresses. 'We got a list from the council but there was a problem in that when people sign up to the register they can opt out of the main register to avoid getting junk mail,' she says. 'But it also meant that the council couldn't give us their names and address.' The project resorted to sending a letter to every household in the area explaining what it was doing and inviting them to voluntarily join its register.

It also broadened the field. 'We extended the vote to 16- and 17-year-olds so that was quite a to-do,' Sue Bickler says. 'We also opened it to anyone living in the area, even those whose status wouldn't normally have allowed them to vote. Not a lot of them registered with us but we made it possible.'

The actual election process was handed over to the Electoral Reform Service. 'It involved a huge amount of work, even just stuffing and sealing envelopes, and we would have been vulnerable to accusations of abusing the process and other criticisms,' she says. 'So we got the professionals in.'

The council's reaction, she says, has been broadly positive. 'It's now run by the Liberal Democrats and the process fitted in with their policy of encouraging local control. They watched the process with interest and some councillors were certainly interested in the postal vote.' Some, she suggests, are slightly ambivalent about neighbourhood management's role more generally. 'A few are unclear about our precise role or adding another layer of bureaucracy but they've been broadly supportive.'

There is healthy discussion at board meetings. 'We don't fall out,' says Henderson. 'I tell Harry [Cutler] what I think…' 'And I tell her what I think,' retorts Cutler. 'He hates it!' jokes Henderson. 'But in fact, even by election and selection, it's a great board. They're young, old, middle-aged, male, female, ex-councillors, people that have never been to university in their life. It's a great team.'