HASLEMERE could lose its voice on local planning issues because too few borough councillors attend meetings.
Last week's probity-in-planning sub-committee meeting heard that replies to a questionnaire distributed to councillors indicated that while it was agreed that local meetings "bring matters close to the grass roots", there were many disadvantages.
Disadvantages included the lack of facilities and the smallness of Haslemere Town Hall council chamber, insufficient room for the public, lack of presentation facilities as well as councillors having to transport bundles of paperwork.
The report said: "There is a lack of justification for the expense in continuing meetings at Haslemere," with the southern area development control sub-committee having fewer applications than the other three planning committees held at Farnham, Godalming and Cranleigh.
The report concluded that while fewer than half Waverley's 57 councillors replied to the questionnaire, 17 rejected the idea that all development control meetings should be held at the council offices in Godalming.
At last week's meeting of the southern area development control sub-committee severalcouncillors were absent including chairman Ann Mugford, Jean Mansley, George Miller, and Douglas Commaille.
There were two substitute members, David Inman (Alfold and Dunsfold) and David Munro (Farnham Bourne).
The meeting included a controversial planning application for Chiddingfold and the over-crowded public gallery of the council chamber contained 23 people who had come to hear the debate.
A recent report by audit inspector Hilary Morse,said: "One of the area sub committees is relatively small and the council needs to ensure good attendance to guard against risks of probity."
Chairman of overview and scrutiny for environment and planning, Dr Rosemary Thomas, told The Herald that it was the Haslemere southern area development control sub committee which was being referred to. She said: "One of the questions raised by the inspector was, if the number of people at the meetings is not representative, should you look into moving the meeting or, should you have more members from other areas?"
There was a mixed response to the suggestion from Haslemere's councillors.
James Mackie, member of the southern area development control sub-committee, said: "I would not like to see the meetings go to Godalming. I think our usefulness depends on our local knowledge. I also think that by having the meetings outside Haslemere it would be more difficult for local people who are interested in planning applications to go to the meetings."
But member of the probity- in-planning sub-committee and chairman of the southern area development control sub-committees, Ann Mugford, said she would welcome the move.
"The council chamber at Haslemere is too small to accommodate very many members of the public and the officers have to travel all the way from Godalming with bundles of papers. I think the move will certainly happen at some point but I could not say when," she said.
Concerns about the difficulties of access to Haslemere's council chamber for disabled people were raised by Denys Kinsella.
He said: "There are no formal plans about to change the meetings to Godalming but I know we have discussed problems regarding access to the town hall and its limited facilities for members of the public."
Under current legislation the public must be allowed to attend borough council planning meetings. If there is a controversial matter on the agenda likely to attract a crowd, the meeting has to be held at an alternative venue, such as Haslemere Museum.
Mrs Mugford said that soon it would be "decreed" that meetings attended by even small numbers of the public would have to be held in other venues because of fire risks. She said that Waverley offices at Godalming would be better for all concerned.
At present there are monthly meetings of the southern area development control committee in Farnham and Haslemere.
As well as concern from the audit inspector about the number of councillors attending the meetings, Dr Thomas told the Herald that the inspector felt there were not enough applications to warrant meetings in Farnham and Haslemere.
However, amember of Haslemere's sub committee Peter Isherwood said there was always "plenty of work for southern area members."
Haslemere mayor Michael Barnes expressed concern about the suggestion of a move and said that he would like to look into the situation with Waverley and to see if there were any ways to resolve problems with the Town Hall.
"It would be a terrible shame if these meetings were not held in Haslemere. I would like to feel the town features prominently in borough council decisions because it is an important part of Waverley," he said.
He added that if the meetings were held in Godalming it would be more than likely that even fewer members of the sub committee would attend.
A spokesman for Waverley Borough Council said there were no formal proposals to change the Haslemere meetings of the southern area development control committee at present.