A BITTER war of words has broken out about the future of the Salisbury city boundary.

The first major review of the parish council boundaries since the 1950s recommends that 300 homes at Bishopdown Farm become part of Laverstock and Ford.

Cllr Richard Clewer branded the conclusion a “stitch-up”.

He and colleague Mary Douglas have proposed a new motion to explore merging Salisbury City Council (SCC) with Laverstock and Ford Parish Council (LFPC) – a move SCC has backed from the start.

Cllrs Clewer and Douglas are “very concerned” the option was not properly investigated and did not even feature in the review’s final report.

“We need to stand up for our council,” Cllr Clewer said. “What has been put forward is a fudge.

“On a map, Laverstock is closer than Harnham, which is part of the city council.”

“The reason why we put in the motion is there needs to be a full discussion, it is about what is right.”

When asked why he believed the working party excluded the initial request by SCC to look at a merger he replied: “I don’t know.”

They say Salisbury residents are subsidising Laverstock and Ford parishioners, who pay on average £93 a year less parish council tax. Currently the parish precept for SCC is £105 a year for a band D property compared to just under £13 for LFPC. Supporters of the merger claim many in Laverstock use services in Salisbury.

The Labour party is split, with Cllr John Walsh backing the motion – against the party line.

“I’m not surprised Hampton Park might well be swallowed up by Laverstock and Ford,” Cllr Walsh said.

“Wiltshire Council, for financial reasons, was not prepared to fight for the city’s logical expansion.”

Jane Scott has given Tory councillors a free vote.

The group looking into the changes said Laverstock’s proposal “better reflected the community identity of the area” and had local support.

SCC members fear the boundary changes will not be reversed, with no further review in the next 20 years.

In a private email, city clerk Reg Williams told city councillors losing the homes would have a “far-reaching and damaging impact on SCC’s financial stability”, and “almost certainly”

force cuts. And he said taking assets from Wiltshire Council would be “simply unaffordable” without a “massive” council tax hike.

In a letter to all Wiltshire councillors, seen by the Journal, Mr Williams lashed out at the working party – a four man committee including a councillor from each political group.

He singled Laverstock councillor Ian McLennan, who publicly backed the LFPC case.

Mr Williams said the council was “puzzled” and “concerned” a member of such a small working group represented the “most contentious area being discussed”. “It simply cannot be right he has been able to directly influence the draft outcomes as a working group appointee when he so clearly has a very direct and close connection to the areas being considered.”

Cllr McLennan hit back, saying he was excluded from talks about the Laverstock/Salisbury boundary.

“When the discussions for our own ward were involved, each of the working group members left the meeting,” Cllr McLennan said.

He said Mr Williams should have contacted him or the council, rather than “cast doubts over his integrity”.

“The argument seems to wholly be that everyone uses Salisbury facilities and do not pay for them. If that was true, then every parish, who looks to a market town, is the same.”

LFPC chairman David Burton accused SCC of “underhand tactics”, saying the letter was posted, rather than emailed, to avoid it reaching Cllr McLennan, who is on holiday in Cyprus.

Laverstock councillor Bill Moss described the motion as “nonsense”.

“I think it is awful that Salisbury wants to gobble everything up,” he said Cllr Burton added that LFPC were doing a “fantastic job”, citing the refurbishment of Riverbourne Community Farm and Old Sarum community centre as examples.

LFPC also pointed out that parishioners overwhelmingly supported being separate from the city.

The motion will be discussed at next Tuesday’s full council.