Municipality of Clarington Ward Boundary Review (WBR) Dr. Robert Williams + Dr. Zachary Spicer July, 2020
Introduction What Will Be Covered in This PIC? Legislative Why a Ward Framework & Phase 1 Public Boundary the Review Issues Participation Review? Process www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 2
Introduction How well does the present electoral structure serve the citizens of Clarington? Does the present electoral structure provide fair and effective representation? Would an alternative system provide better representation for the citizens of Clarington? www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 3
Context Town of Newcastle Town of Newcastle created renamed Clarington 1973 1993 1996 COUNCIL Mayor Mayor (elected at-large) (elected at-large) 3 Regional Councillors 2 Regional Councillors (1 per ward) (each elected into pair of wards) 3 Local Councillors 4 Local Councillors (1 per ward) (1 per ward) www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 4
WHY A WARD BOUNDARY REVIEW? To prepare Clarington Council to make decisions on whether to maintain the existing ward structure or to adopt an alternative arrangement www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 5
Legislative Framework Re. municipal system of No stipulated schedule, standardized representation, Ontario’s Municipal process or established criteria exist for Act, 2001 authorizes a lower-tier electoral reviews in Ontario municipality to: • define the size of the Council • Each municipality must set its own terms, parameters, guiding principles, etc. • determine how Council (other than the Mayor) will be elected • A review is typically framed by established procedures and principles • “divide or re-divide the municipality applied in several Ontario municipalities into wards or dissolve the existing (and by the Local Planning Appeal wards” Tribunal (LPAT)) and judicial rulings on representation www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 6
Review Process Phase 1 1 2 3 4 Research & Interviews With Prepare Public Data Compilation Council/Mayor & Discussion Consultation Senior Staff Paper www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 7
Review Process Phase 2 1 2 3 4 Population Development of Public Develop Final Forecasting/ Preliminary Ward Consultation Ward Boundary Data Modelling Boundary Options Options & Recommendations to Council www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 8
Phase 1 Issues What is the rationale for electing four Local Councillors in a municipality with a population of approximately 100,000? Does the size and make-up of the present wards allow Councillors to provide effective political management and effective representation of the diversity of the municipality, and be “close to the people”? What are the strengths and weaknesses of having a ward system in Clarington? www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 9
Guiding Principles to Design Wards A ward-based electoral system should meet these core principles/guidelines: 1 Representation by Population 2 Community or Diversity of Interests 3 Effective Representation 4 Population Trends 5 Community Access and Connections 6 Geographic or Topographical Features 10 www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview
Phase 1 Decisions The WBR begins with an assessment of the present ward system to determine whether it constitutes an equitable and effective electoral arrangement (i.e. “effective representation”) to the residents of the municipality • If there are shortcomings, the Consultants will present alternatives for consideration. www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview
Phase 1 Assessment Preliminary assessment of the present ward system suggests: • Present wards fail to adhere to the representation by population principle • Population disparities throughout the wards expected to worsen through the next three election cycles www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 12
Populations by Ward 32,860 32,252 30,763 35,000 27,651 20,122 30,000 17,652 28,184 25,000 24,014 17,675 16,071 20,000 17,403 15,000 Est. Population 2020 14,945 10,000 Population 2016 5,000 Population 2011 0 1 2 3 4 Ward Population 2011 Population 2016 Est. Population 2020 www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview
Phase 1 Assessment (cont’d) Preliminary assessment of the present ward system suggests: • Present wards fail to adhere to the representation by population principle • Population disparities throughout the wards expected to worsen through the next three election cycles • Three major communities in separate wards but northern hamlets seem to have more in common with one another than the southern communities • Bowmanville divided into two wards • Existing ward boundaries straightforward and easy to comprehend • Rural Clarington distributed across the four wards www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 14
Existing Ward Map www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 15
Effective Representation? Overarching principle of ‘’effective representation’’ means: • each resident ideally should have comparable access to their elected representative • each local Councillor ideally should speak on behalf of an equal number of residents Current population disparities between wards are too great to achieve effective representation (especially on Regional Council) www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 16
Other Considerations? Regional Councillors in Clarington are elected in a grouping of wards; • the number of local wards is tied to the number of Regional Councillors. • Should Regional Councillors continue to be elected in wards? Local Councillors are elected in single-member wards. • The number of wards = the number of Local Councillors. • If there are to be wards, should they each elect one Councillor or more? www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 17
Do the Wards Need to Be Changed? If the wards do not provide “effective representation” based on the core • principles, possible alternatives to “re-divide” the municipality will be developed taking into account quantitative and qualitative data and subjected to the same principles • No ward system design can uniformly meet all the core principles • Which principles have the highest priority in Clarington? (survey) • Alternatives will be filtered through the set of core principles, case law and successful models adopted in other municipalities www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 18
A Consultation Process A municipal electoral system should be subject to a public consultation process to ensure the legitimacy of the recommendations placed before Council Public engagement activities will be conducted Aimed at both informing residents about the review and gathering informed evaluations about the existing system and (later) alternative designs Several outlets have been designed for residents to safely participate in the review process under public health guidelines www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 19
Roles of Council The Consultant Team works at arm’s length from Council & staff • All members of Council were invited to participate in an interview as part of information gathering about the municipality, its communities and the present political representation arrangements in the municipality. • Council has the authority to: • establish the number of councillors and to determine whether they “shall be elected by general vote or wards or by any combination of general vote and wards.” 1 pass a by-law to “redivide” the wards 2 that may be appealed to LPAT 3 • 1 Municipal Act, 2001 s.217 2 Municipal Act, 2001 s.222 www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 3 Municipal Act, 2001 s.223 20
What Does a Successful Review Look Like? To be successful, the review should operate with a high degree of • independence from political involvement and include effective engagement with residents An open review process requires: • transparency and consistency in the review process and its outcomes • • clear and workable core principles to evaluate alternative electoral systems and ward designs that fit the unique requirements of a municipality www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 21
From Phase 1 to Phase 2 The Discussion Paper Report and PICs will contribute to: 1 An opportunity for the Consultant team to better understand Clarington An understanding of the preferences of members of the public 2 who choose to participate in the Review 3 The development of alternative preliminary ward options www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 22
Project Next Steps Based on feedback from this public consultation, next steps will include: 1 Preparing alternative ward designs that will be brought to a public consultation Making recommendations to Council for a change to the 2 present ward configuration (If existing ward configuration is determined to not meet the core principles) A by-law to enact the new boundaries would be brought 3 to a later Council meeting for adoption www.clarington.net/wardboundaryreview 23
Recommend
More recommend
