Wedi dweud hynny, mae nifer o gwestiynau’n cael eu codi yn yr adolygiad y mae angen eu hystyried ymhellach, ac mae’r angen i ganolbwyntio ar yr ymateb i’r pandemig wedi golygu na fu’n bosibl rhoi’r ystyriaeth briodol iddynt. Er enghraifft, mae gwahaniaeth barn o ran a ddylai cynghorwyr gael eistedd ar gyngor cymuned yn ogystal â phrif gyngor; ai am un tymor yn unig y dylid cyfethol cynghorwyr; beth fyddai’r ffordd orau o ddiffinio’r rolau hynny, sy’n seiliedig ar le, y gallai cynghorau cymuned ymgymryd â nhw. Hefyd, mae cwestiynau eraill y gellid ymchwilio iddynt, megis a ddylai fod yn ofynnol i glercod feddu ar y cymhwyster priodol, ac a ddylai Gweinidogion fod â phwerau ymyrryd cymesur. Mae angen datblygu’r camau gweithredu hyn ymhellach yn ystod tymor y Senedd nesaf, gan weithio gyda’n partneriaid i ddatblygu cynigion polisi clir, y gallai fod angen deddfwriaeth bellach ar gyfer rhai ohonynt. Mater i’r Llywodraeth nesaf fyddai symud ymlaen â’r rhain yn ôl ei blaenoriaethau.
That said, there are a number of questions raised in the Review that required further thought, and the need to focus on the response to the pandemic has delayed giving them due consideration. For instance, there are a range of views on whether councillors should be able to sit on both community and principal councils, whether councillors should be co-opted for a maximum of one term, or how best to define the place-based roles that community councils could undertake. There are other questions that could be explored, such as whether clerks should be required to be qualified, and whether Ministers should have proportionate intervention powers. These actions require further development in the next Senedd Term, working with our partners to develop clear policy proposals, some of which may require further legislation. It is for the next Government to take these forward in line with their priorities.