The Epping Forest District Council meeting scheduled for 15 September 2025 included discussion of local government reform in Essex, with councillors asked to indicate their preferred option to the cabinet. This indication would inform the Cabinet's formal endorsement of one option to be submitted to the government by 26 September 2025. Councillors were also scheduled to consider whether to exclude the public and press from the meeting.

Local Government Reform in Essex

The main item for discussion was the Local Government Reform (LGR) in Essex. The government had invited Essex councils to propose a unitary model of local government for the area, and the council was asked to consider various business cases and indicate a preferred option to the cabinet.

The report pack included a summary of the government's criteria for unitary local government, as set out in a letter from the Minister of State dated 5 February 2025. These criteria included:

• Establishing a single tier of local government
• Ensuring unitary local government is the right size to achieve efficiencies, improve capacity and withstand financial shocks
• Prioritising the delivery of high quality and sustainable public services
• Demonstrating how councils have sought to work together and meet local needs
• Supporting devolution arrangements
• Enabling stronger community engagement and delivering genuine opportunity for neighbourhood empowerment

The report noted that public engagement had shown 86% support for reorganisation if it improves public services. It also noted that a single tier of local government would remove some frustrations experienced by councillors and residents, and allow residents to be treated more holistically.

The report stated that four business cases had been prepared, reflecting differing views on the best way forward. These were:

• 3 Unitary Councils, led by Essex County Council
• 4 Unitary Councils, led by Thurrock Council
• 4 Unitary Councils, led by Rochford Borough Council
• 5 Unitary Councils, led by Southend City Council

A summary of each business case was included in the report, along with links to the full business cases where available.

3 Unitary Councils - Essex County Council

The Essex County Council business case focused on groupings that would create three broadly equally sized councils. Epping Forest would be grouped with Harlow, Brentwood, Chelmsford and Maldon. The business case argued that this option would strike the right balance between creating authorities that are financially viable, geographically coherent, service-resilient and focused enough to meet local need.

The Essex County Council business case proposed using the recently revised County Council ward boundaries as building blocks, which would mean reducing the number of councillors within Essex from 700 to 285.

4 Unitary Councils - Thurrock Council

The business case proposed by Thurrock would group Epping Forest with Harlow, Brentwood and Thurrock, reflecting a shared outer London geography. However, the report noted that Thurrock was facing financial challenges and operating with government commissioners, which could create a risk for any council paired with it.

4 Unitary Councils - Rochford Borough Council

The Rochford Borough Council business case proposed separating Rochford from Southend. The report noted that this failed to reflect the close connections between the two areas, and would create uneven populations with the smallest grouping being approximately half the size of the largest.

5 Unitary Councils - Southend City Council

The Southend City Council business case proposed grouping Epping Forest with only Uttlesford and Harlow, broadly following the M11 corridor. The report noted that this business case challenged the financial data produced by Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC), asserting that smaller is more costly, and commissioned its own financial model which concluded that 5 unitary councils would save more than any other option.

The report also noted that the five unitary model would group Thurrock and Basildon together, which could create a serious risk to ongoing financial viability given that both councils have some of the highest debt burdens in Essex.

Council's View

The report stated that Epping Forest District Council had not declared a position earlier in the process, preferring to be led by the data. It noted that officers had been working to support the development of all cases, but had latterly been concentrating on supporting the business case for 3 unitary councils, which was being led by Essex County Council.

The report concluded that the decision was complex and there were elements in each proposal which were attractive, but that the government was specific that each council may only endorse a single business case proposal. It suggested that the business case for 3 unitary councils would stand a better chance of being financially stable, channel most resources into service delivery and reduce the risk in transition from existing structures to new unitary councils. However, it recognised that to address the size aspect it would need to concentrate on developing Neighbourhood Area Committees that give communities real influence over local decisions and a real voice which will be heard.

Exclusion of Public and Press

The agenda included consideration of whether, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972¹, the public and press should be excluded from the meeting for certain items of business. This would be on the grounds that they would involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.