How easy is it to get the mechanics of change right?
We spoke to James Farrar, Chief Executive of the York & North Yorkshire Combined Mayoral Authority.
Why?
Similar to Sussex and Brighton, York and North Yorkshire has an urban–rural–coastal economy, a big national park, and lots of independent towns and a small city, rather than one mega-metro area.
They have also just been through the process of local government reorganisation and the election of a mayor.
What we learnt
-
There’s a real machine behind the mayor
A lean, non-political officer team (think ~150 across the core authority and policing functions) that stewards public money and turns priorities into delivery. The mayor leads; officers keep the wheels on.
-
Quick wins buy time for big wins
They pre-built a pipeline so year one could show visible results (stations, EV points, culture, high street boosts) while longer projects (transport, skills, housing) moved through the gears.
-
Partnership over point-scoring
Their cabinet mixes political colours. Two guardrails keep things sane:
-
the mayor must be on the “yes” side of any decision; and
-
local leaders must support schemes in their patch.
Add tight officer-to-officer working and the temperature drops.
-
Plan for many towns, not one hub
They funded each town to write its own plan, based on the principle that the centre supports, doesn’t dictate. Ownership matters.
-
Accountability is more than a consultation
Formal evaluations happen, but real legitimacy needs two-way engagement - especially hard in rural geographies. Business boards, colleges and VCS networks are key anchors.
What have the benefits of devolution been to North Yorkshire so far?
-
Reach into Whitehall: quarterly seats with No.10, Treasury and 12 departments; clout that districts and small cities simply don’t get.
-
Longer-term funding: move from bid-of-the-month to multi-year settlements and a 10-year pipeline.
-
Integrated settlements: plans to eventually blend transport, skills, housing and net zero cash against outcomes (not box-ticking), which also attracts private finance.
Key advice from our friends in the north
Listen first. Agree a pre-election economic framework all councils can sign, so any incoming mayor can start on day one. And remember: every spreadsheet line should trace back to a person in a place.
🎧 Listen to the full interview here.
This podcast episode is brought to you in partnership with Galloways Accounting - Sussex’s largest independent accountancy practice. With six offices from Worthing to Brighton to Eastbourne to Uckfield, they combine deep local knowledge with cutting-edge cloud accounting tools.
They support family businesses, charities, tech start-ups and professional practices - helping clients streamline finances, manage cash flow and plan for growth.
Their specialist teams in R&D tax credits, payroll and succession planning keep Sussex enterprises competitive and compliant. To see how Galloways powers smarter financial decisions across our county, visit wearegalloways.com
---
A quick update on Local Government Reorganisation
West Sussex
Last week all West Sussex councils published a joint business case to replace the two-tier system with unitary local government. A long-list of 16 options became five; two fell at the financial hurdle; three remain viable.
The final shortlisted options
-
option A — one county-wide unitary (≈901k residents)
-
option B1 — two unitaries (west / east)
-
option B2 — two unitaries (south-west / north-east)
Money vs identity (the honest trade-off)
-
option A forecasts £48.8m net annual benefit once steady state is reached.
-
options B1/B2 forecast £18.8m net annual benefit.
-
Public sentiment from 9,332 survey responses: 62% prefer two unitaries (of these, 62% favour B2, 28% favour B1); 23% prefer a single unitary; 16% no preference.
Service delivery and devolution fit
-
All three viable options meet government tests on creating a single tier and being the right size.
-
Each enables service reform; two-unitary models carry disaggregation risks in transition that need tight programme control.
-
Any West Sussex model would sit within a wider Sussex strategic authority footprint alongside East Sussex and Brighton & Hove.
What happens next
-
The business case deliberately does not name a single winner. It sets out evidence; each council will now state a preference before submitting to the Secretary of State.
-
If approved, transition design starts October 2025, with a cabinet-and-leader model and locality committees for neighbourhood voice.
So what?
-
If government wants maximum savings and one clear voice, they’ll lean towards option A.
-
If they want local identity and a closer democratic feel with more concentrated economic corridors, they’ll lean towards options B1/B2 (with B2 currently the public favourite).
-
Whichever path is chosen must mesh with a Sussex-wide deal and the possibility of a mayor - otherwise we risk building elegant, expensive silos.
📑 Read the whole (102 page) West Sussex business case here.
East Sussex
At the same time, East Sussex has published its own business case for local government reorganisation. Like West Sussex, it responds to the Government’s call for two-tier areas to propose unitary models.
The final shortlisted options
-
option A — a single county-wide unitary (≈557k residents).
-
option B — two unitaries (coastal strip / inland & north).
-
option C — three unitaries, centred on Hastings/Rother, Eastbourne/Lewes, and Wealden.
Financial case
-
The single-county option offers the largest headline savings - around £32m net per year once transition is complete.
-
The two-unitary option delivers around £15m net per year; the three-unitary model is lower still and carries high transition costs.
Public and stakeholder sentiment
-
A majority of residents (just over 60%) prefer a two-unitary model, citing community identity and service access.
-
Support for a single county-wide unitary was stronger among business networks and some service leaders, who emphasised efficiency and long-term resilience.
-
The three-unitary option drew the least support overall, though it found favour in Hastings and Lewes where identity and place-based governance were emphasised.
Criteria and risks
-
All three meet the baseline viability test, though the three-unitary model scores lowest on financial stability.
-
The single-county option provides the greatest clout in devolution talks, but the two-unitary model may fit more naturally with local identity and coastal/inland economic geography.
-
Transition risks are flagged in all cases, especially around splitting children’s services and adult social care.
So what?
-
Government's final decision about East Sussex will need to consider a dilemma: the case focusing on money and efficiency point to one county-wide unitary, while some strong opinions around identity and geography point to a two-unitary solution.
-
With West Sussex public preference leaning towards two-unitary models (especially B2), and East Sussex also recording majority support for a split, the Government will need to weigh efficiency and economics against majority citizen opinion across both counties.
📑 Read the whole (184 page) East Sussex business case here.
Brighton & Hove
Key Council meetings will be taking place on 22nd and 24th September to finalise their business case and submission to Government.
%20-%20newsletter%20(13).png?upscale=true&width=1120&upscale=true&name=SATC%20100%20(60%20x%2021%20cm)%20-%20newsletter%20(13).png)