What a Town Council would actually be

The case in brief

High Wycombe is the only major town in Buckinghamshire without its own parish or town council. In its place sit two bodies, both made up of the same 16 Buckinghamshire councillors whose wards clip the unparished area: the High Wycombe Town Committee, and the Charter Trustees who annually nominate the Mayor of High Wycombe. Nobody is directly elected to represent the town as the town. That is the gap a town council closes.

This is not a fringe demand. In Buckinghamshire’s own 2024 consultation, 60% of 2,532 verified respondents backed a town council. The then Conservative-led council rejected it, citing the 4.6% response rate rather than the result. The council is now under No Overall Control, so the majority that produced that decision no longer holds.

What it would control and could deliver

A town council is the neighbourhood tier. It would not run roads, schools, social care, waste or strategic planning — those stay with Buckinghamshire. What it can do, drawing on what comparable councils run:

• Town-centre life: events, markets, festivals, Christmas lights, public realm and town-centre management.
• Parks, open spaces, allotments, public toilets and community buildings — through assets handed down from Buckinghamshire.
• Grants to local groups, at a neighbourhood scale a 550,000-population county cannot match.
• A statutory voice on planning, and the power to make a Neighbourhood Plan that carries legal weight in decisions.
• Participatory budgeting — residents directly allocating part of the spend, as Frome has done for years.

What it would cost — honestly

A town council is funded by a precept: a locally set line on the council tax bill, collected by Buckinghamshire and passed across in full. An indicative launch precept of £60–90 at Band D is roughly £1.20–£2.00 a week; most Wycombe homes are in Bands A–C and would pay less. For context against real comparators:

The proposed range sits at or below the cheapest mature comparator. We ask the campaign to be bound by a published commitment: a capped, modest launch precept, with any future rise set through the council’s own policy and its participatory budget. Town precepts are not subject to the referendum cap that applies to larger councils, which is precisely why a self-imposed cap matters.

The “double taxation” objection, answered

The strongest objection deserves a straight answer. First, residents already pay for this. Buckinghamshire already levies a Band D “special expenses” charge of £17.99 plus a £2.43 Charter Trustees charge — £20.42 a year, about £0.5m across the town — on this exact area, for cemeteries, recreation grounds, allotments, footway lighting, the war memorial, grants and town events. A town council inherits those services and that funding, so the real change to a Band D bill is the precept minus the £20.42 already charged. Second, the central ask to councillors: a new council should come with services and assets devolved to it. The clearest lesson from comparable towns is that a council handed real assets (the Wiltshire and Salisbury model) delivers, while one layered on top of a unitary that keeps the assets (Sutton Coldfield’s early years) stalls. We ask for that devolution up front.

Proposed structure

• Area: the seven-ward unparished core (~55,000 electors): Abbey, Booker/Cressex & Castlefield, Downley, Ryemead & Micklefield, Terriers & Amersham Hill, Totteridge & Bowerdean, and West Wycombe.
• Councillors: around 18–21, directly elected across town wards — within Buckinghamshire’s own 13–25 estimate, with the exact number set by the review.
• Elections: four-yearly, co-timed with the Buckinghamshire elections to lift turnout and cut cost.
• Mayor: the new council appoints a town mayor, inheriting the civic regalia from the dissolved Charter Trustees.
• Day one: a capped launch precept, a cross-party conduct code, and participatory budgeting.

An advantage most campaigns miss

With a “made” Neighbourhood Plan, a town council captures 25% of the local Community Infrastructure Levy — uncapped — instead of the 15% (capped at £100 per home) available without one. High Wycombe has had an active levy since 2012; without a parish, that neighbourhood share is currently kept by Buckinghamshire. As development comes forward, that is recurring local infrastructure money that exists today and is not reaching the town, because the town has no council to receive it.

Running it well

New town councils succeed where they control real assets and keep precept rises modest, and fail where precepts ratchet (Morecambe) or a single faction captures a body with weak scrutiny. A council can also be unwound if it loses local consent, as Lickey End was after a 2010 campaign. The defence is the same in every case: sustained legitimacy — a low launch precept, visible early wins, participatory budgeting, and a broad, cross-party founding council.

The route to creating one

Under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, a petition signed by 7.5% of local electors — about 4,135 of the roughly 55,000 in the seven wards — compels Buckinghamshire to hold a Community Governance Review. That review, which by law completes within twelve months of its terms of reference, is the formal route to a directly elected town council. The 2024 rejection rested on a low response rate; a petition that clears the legal threshold answers that directly. The town’s MP, Emma Reynolds, has called it “clearly unfair that High Wycombe is the only major town in Buckinghamshire not to benefit from a town council.”

← Back to the campaignHow we weighted the result →