The Cabinet of Hertfordshire County Council met on Thursday 20 November 2025 to discuss the submission of final proposals for local government reorganisation in Hertfordshire. The Cabinet agreed to submit the proposal with a two-unitary option as the preferred choice and to include a letter outlining the council's concerns about the process.

Local Government Reorganisation in Hertfordshire

The Cabinet agreed to submit a proposal for local government reorganisation in Hertfordshire, advocating for a two-unitary council structure as its preferred option. This decision followed an indicative vote by the Full Council the previous day, which favoured the two-unitary model. Alongside the submission, Hertfordshire County Council will also send a letter detailing concerns raised by the council regarding the process of reorganisation.

The decision was made in response to the government's English Devolution White Paper, published on 16 December 2024, which outlined plans for local government reorganisation in two-tier areas. Councils were invited to propose single-tier structures, with final proposals due by 28 November 2025. A Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) programme team, working with consultants IMPOWER, prepared the submission, which considered options for two, three, or four unitary councils.

During the debate, Councillor Walter Kofsky stated his support for the two-unitary option, emphasizing his commitment to following the will of the full council. Councillor Chris Lucas also supported the two-unitary option, describing it as the most cost effective and the most effective in terms of how we can seamlessly segue into the disaggregation. He added that this option was considered the most effective for Hertfordshire and North Hertfordshire in particular.

Councillor Anthony Rowlands highlighted the importance of unitary authorities for children in care, noting that Hertfordshire County Council has a very good record, a strong record in its role as corporate parent. He argued that having these responsibilities under one authority, rather than two separate ones, makes practical sense. Councillor Jim, while accepting the need to move to two authorities, expressed concern about the potential disruption, stating, I fear that this will be disruptive. I think it is undoubtedly going to have to cause people to sit back and think different priorities from the ones they've necessarily been addressing.

The Leader of the Council, Steve Jarvis, acknowledged concerns about the short-term impact of reorganisation on services and residents, but expressed a personal assessment that in the long term, what the government proposes will deliver better local government. He also noted the ongoing lack of clarity from the government on certain details, particularly regarding devolution.

The Cabinet's decision to proceed with the two-unitary option was based on the Full Council's indicative vote, where 24 members voted in favour of this option, compared to 2 for the three-unitary option and 5 for the four-unitary option. The Cabinet also agreed to submit a letter outlining the council's concerns about the process, which included opposition to what was described as a flawed, rushed and disruptive process and significant concerns about the impact of service disaggregation on residents and the local economy.

The report accompanying the decision detailed the financial modelling for the proposed options. The two-unitary proposal was projected to achieve higher annual recurring savings (£50m-£55m) by 2031/32 compared to the three- and four-unitary options. The modelling also indicated that the two-unitary option would not require equalisation for viability, unlike the four-unitary option.

The report also addressed legal, equalities, and sustainability implications. It noted that proposals should ideally be based on existing district council boundaries but that modified boundaries could be considered if a strong justification based on public services and financial sustainability was provided. An Equalities Impact Assessment identified potential risks and opportunities, emphasizing the principle of equality by design for new councils. A sustainability impact assessment highlighted opportunities to enhance sustainability governance and delivery, with benefits outweighing risks.

The meeting also noted that the minutes of the previous Cabinet meeting on 6 November 2025 were deferred to the next meeting on 2 December 2025. There were no questions from members of the council to executive members, and no public petitions were presented.