I favour admin level 5 too. West Midlands CA is tagged as 6 which was a pure estimate by me as being at least equivalent to the constituent LA members. Transport is a heck of a slice of its budget and function (capital £300m and operating £100m) It also plays a big role in economic development ( which includes skills development) and strategic planning for housing (with a big budget for brownfield remediation) and has just been given a budget of £100m for taking on the responsibility for adult education. WMCA also has projects in the area of mental health and I believe the Manchester CA has responsibility for health generally. So CAs do have quite a few uber admin functions at a level "above" existing authorities which the constituent members have relinquished and should be given an admin level. Quite how you represent the associate "observer" members is a puzzle I've steered clear of
regards Brian On Sun, 26 Jul 2020 at 23:52, Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl> wrote: > Hi, > > I think we need to discuss tagging of Combined Authorities. I spotted an > edit that changed the tagging on West Yorkshire Combined Authority, and it > was pointed out to me that there were already other instances of similar > tagging for Combined Authorities (Greater Manchester for example). > > CAs have basically zero interaction with the public, except for the > directly elected Mayor; although they have certain statutory tasks (public > transport etc). They can be seen as a grouping of local authorities, as > opposed to a LA in their own right. Should they really be tagged as > boundary=administrative at all? Or should they have a parallel hierarchy as > is used for police areas for example? > > If they are accepted as boundary=administrative, what admin level should > be used? The LAs of which the CAs are composed are sometimes Metropolitan > Boroughs with admin_level=8, and sometimes Unitary Authorities with > admin_level=6. I am tending towards admin_level=5; this value is/was in use > for the Regions, but they no longer have an admin function (if they ever > had one) so I consider admin level 5 as "available" for use by Combined > Authorities. > > An alternative may be to represent them as relations containing as members > the constituent authorities. This would have the advantage of the ability > (through the use of roles) to distinguish between "constituent councils" > which are full members and "non-constituent councils" which only > participate in certain committees. > > Any thoughts or comments? > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
