Plans to split Warwickshire into two unitary councils were backed by Stratford-on-Avon's district councillors this week despite the Conservative opposition remaining unconvinced.

The ruling Liberal Democrat group was joined by Green Party colleagues in voting to progress proposals to form an authority covering south Warwickshire – the current Stratford and Warwick districts – on Monday.

All bar one Conservative and both independents chose to not to vote either way, mainly on the basis that arguments for or against are not fully formed. Cllr Chris Mills cast the sole vote against.

The position will now be subject to a public engagement exercise which will inform the council's final submission to national government, the body that will decide if competing positions are put forward, in November. 

The government has asked two-tier areas like Warwickshire, where the majority of council services are delivered across a county council and then districts and boroughs, to form unitary authorities, single councils that handle those services under one roof.

The argument is whether it is best to do that under one new county-wide authority, which is Warwickshire County Council's current preference, or form separate entities covering the north and south. 

A Deloitte report commissioned by all five of Warwickshire's districts and boroughs suggests a county-wide unitary would achieve greater financial savings but that two unitaries would be the best option against all other criteria – governance, public service delivery, local identity, enabling devolution plans and stronger community engagement. 

Many pros and cons were discussed on Monday but there was particular focus on the value of local representation and financial matters.

Cllr Victoria Alcock expressed fears over vulnerable residents slipping through the cracks if those elected are asked to cover large areas.

"I live in my ward, I work there, my kids went to school there, I volunteer there and I socialise there," she said.

"I know what is going on, while there are a lot of houses it is quite a condensed area.

"Going to a very large unitary, if a councillor has a larger area to cover you lose that. The only people who suffer are the residents, vulnerable people that we as councillors know about.

"Having somebody faceless coming into a large area, residents will suffer and in quite a big way."

Cllr Ian Shenton confessed his start position was that of "a one-Warwickshire person" and offered a different perspective.

"The notion of a more local unitary closer to residents has some attraction but no matter how these unitaries are formed, it would appear that democracy may suffer," he said.

"This will be an issue whatever route is taken. Even with two unitaries, there is no guarantee, for instance, that the council will be based here in Stratford-upon-Avon. 

"One of the arguments that already comes up on a regular basis is that the far east, Southam, feels they are not listened to, forgotten, that what we have now is too remote from them."

He reiterated recent Tory arguments that the information put out for public engagement should be balanced.

"I want to hear from residents about what their thoughts and fears are and I want to see the county's case and whether that stacks up," he said.

"We need to be laying the facts in front of residents, not fiction, inflated projections or unrealistic claims that everything will be far better under one approach or the other.

"That doesn't mean hundreds of pages, it is about the facts, keeping it simple, avoiding jargon and setting out the realistic pros and cons."

Cllr Malcolm Littlewood feels too much has been made of the differences between communities in the north and south of the county, arguing that the variation in Warwickshire's economy means they are better together.

"The markets change, demands change, and a diverse economy is what is healthy, resilient and sustainable," he said. 

Meanwhile, Cllr Stuart Keighley wanted to counter Conservative opinions over the added financial benefits of a county-wide unitary,

"There is always a whole load of uncertainty," he said.

"Often you find savings that you didn't expect but then other savings you did expect don't appear.

"What I took out of the Deloitte report was that the difference in the savings – and I know there is some deeper diving to do into these savings – was just a few million quid per year when the costs of transition are probably 30 (million) per year or more over a considerable period of time.

"The combined costs of services are over £1 billion, so you are talking about savings of less than half a per cent. They could dematerialise without any problem at all."