Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAO-004-12 Clarbgton REPORT CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: September 24, 2012 Resolution#: By-law#: �I Report#: CAO-004-12 File#: Subject: FEDERAL ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES — MUNICIPALITY'S KEY MESSAGES AND PRINCIPLES IN RESPONSE TO BOUNDARY COMMISSION'S PROPOSALS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CAO-004-12 be received for information. Submitted by: c Franklin Wu, M.A.O.M Chief Administrative Officer FWAP CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 REPORT NO.: CAO-004-12 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 The Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Ontario (hereafter referred to as "the Commission") has proposed and will be discussing at public hearings in November, new riding boundaries for the next regular federal election. These are illustrated in the attached map. They would mean that Clarington would be split between three federal ridings, with a minority share of the population of each of these three ridings: • 47.35% of the proposed Oshawa-Bowmanville • 15.7% of the proposed Oshawa-Durham • 14.9% of the proposed Kawartha Lakes-Port Hope-Cobourg Currently, Clarington's population of 84,548 (2012 census) is 67% of the riding of Durham. Scugog (pop. 21,569) makes up 17% and Uxbridge (pop. 20,716) the remaining 16%. PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT AND KEY NEXT STEPS 2.1. The purpose of this report is to follow up on the direction from the September 17th Council meeting, which adopted GPA's September 10th resolution GPA- 432-12 which provided that: • Clarington indicate the municipality's "strong opposition to the proposed electoral boundaries" • staff "register the Municipality to make a presentation to the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Ontario" • staff"report back to the GPA on September 24, 2012 outlining key messages that will be brought forward at the public hearing." 2.2 Staff will be developing alternative federal riding boundary scenarios based on the principles set out in this report and will discuss these with Clarington's community organizations that express interest to the Municipality in this matter, with the Region of Durham's Task Force that is dealing with this matter and other affected municipalities and report back to GPA on October 29th. A final submission will then be prepared to present at the Commission's hearing by Mayor Foster on November 13th in Oshawa. ACTIONS TO DATE: 3.1 Staff have: • registered Mayor Foster to speak at the Nov 13th hearing • discussed with a former and current member of the Commission the decision making process and criteria used by the Commission • met with the Clarington Board of Trade on September 11th and gained the Board's support for GPA's September 10th resolution and the Board determined that it too will seek to appear before the Commission. • placed a public notice in local media on September 19th to advise residents of where to get info about the Commission's proposals and how REPORT NO.: CAO-004-12 PAGE 3 to register to speak to the Commission. The notice also indicated that Clarington is preparing a submission to the Commission on its proposals. A copy of the notice is attached • advised the Regional government of Clarington's resolution. The Regional CAO proposed and Regional Council's Finance and Administration Committee accepted (TSC) on Sept 19th the establishment of a Task Force with each of the area municipalities' mayors invited to participate to propose alternatives to the Commission's proposal. There is interest in ensuring that the Region of Durham is considered whole, i.e., no one part of the Region is combined with another Region or single tier municipality to create a riding • contacted other area municipalities in Durham. Each are just beginning to review the implications of the Commission's proposals and at the time of writing to our knowledge, the councils have not yet taken a formal position. Note that Uxbridge, like Clarington, would be divided by the Commission's proposal and is awaiting the results of Clarington's deliberation on this report before developing their submission. Mayor O'Connor has indicated her strong concern with the Commission's proposal. 4.0 BOUNDARIES COMMISSION'S AUTHORITY, CRITERIA AND RATIONALE 4.1 On August 27, 2012 the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission released its proposed new electoral map for consideration at public hearings this fall. Ontario will gain 15 electoral districts as a result of the increase in its population from the 2011 Census. 4.2 The Commission makes final decisions about where the electoral boundaries will be located. This follows consultation, giving the public and then MPs an opportunity to express their views and participate in the process. The Commission is chaired by Honourable Mr. Justice George Valin and also includes Mr. Douglas Colbourne, an OMB member and Dr. Leslie Pal, a political scientist. 4.3 In its press release the Commission said: "Population shifts and increases, efforts to honour existing municipal boundaries whenever possible, and the establishment of 15 new electoral districts have required substantial adjustment to Ontario's electoral map." 4.4 Under the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, the Commission's main aim in redrawing boundaries is to divide the province into electoral districts as close to the average population — 106,213 - as reasonably possible. The Act permits the Commission to depart from the quota where necessary or desirable in order to: • respect the community of interest or community of identity in, or the historical pattern of an electoral district in the province, or REPORT NO.: CAO-004-12 PAGE 4 • maintain a manageable geographic size for electoral districts in sparsely populated, rural or northern regions of the province. 4.5 When considering these factors, the Commission must make every effort to ensure that, except in circumstances it views as extraordinary, the population of each electoral district in the province remains within 25% (plus or minus) of the electoral quota. The upper limit of deviation from the quota is 132,766, and the lower limit of deviation from the quota is 79,660. The Commission in its "Reasons for Proposed Electoral Boundaries" notes: "Although the Commission preferred to retain current electoral boundaries where possible, it could not always accomplish this. No one electoral district can be considered in isolation from the others immediately surrounding it. Any change to one boundary has an inherent effect on at least one adjoining electoral district. The Commission endeavoured to respect existing municipal boundaries whenever possible. However, in some instances, the location and density of population growth required the Commission to establish electoral districts that crossed municipal boundaries." 4.6 Importantly for Clarington's purposes, the Commission indicates: "The proposals for an electoral district are not acceptable merely on the basis that they are within the allowable 25% variance from the quota. The primary consideration in the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act is that the population of each electoral district in the province be as close to the provincial quota as is reasonably possible. If an electoral district contains a population that is significantly larger than the quota, it is underrepresented. Similarly, an electoral district with a significantly smaller population is overrepresented. However, the principle of representation by population cannot be perfectly implemented. It is virtually impossible to establish an electoral map for 121 electoral districts of equal population that reflects existing municipal boundaries, that recognizes the distinctions between urban, rural and remote communities, and that takes into account community of interest or identity, and historical attachment." 4.7 From the Commission's published reports and from Staff's discussions with a former and current member of the Commission it is clear that (a) the Commission has a challenging balancing act and (b) that any alternative proposals put to the Commission need to be accompanied by an analysis of what it would mean for other communities. 5.0 CLARINGTON'S CHALLENGE AND OPPORTUNITY 5.1 Waterloo, Cambridge and Ajax are municipalities that have populations very close to the 106, 213 number and the Commission has proposed that their boundaries be used as the federal riding boundaries. Clarington, on the other hand, while it has a population that is within the 25% threshold (21% below the quota), is not likely to be successful in arguing that it should have its own riding because of this stated desire by the Commission to be as close to the quota as REPORT NO.: CAO-004-12 PAGE 5 possible. Moreover, arguments that Clarington's population is growing and by the time of the next regular federal election is likely to have a population very close to the quota are similarly not likely to be accepted as the Act governing the Commission's criteria was amended several years ago to remove this criteria of projected population growth. 5.2 Notably, Clarington's population, combined with Scugog, would be 106,117, almost exactly at the quota number. This is but one alternative and obviously needs further discussion with Scugog Township as well as the Mississaugas of Scugog Island and would, aside from meeting the Commission's key criteria, preserve both Clarington's and Scugog's community identity and recognize the historical north/south orientation of municipal, regional, provincial and federal electoral boundaries. It would continue to leave Clarington a dominant share of the population of the riding — 80% (as against the current 67% share) and Scugog 20% (as against the current 17% share). 5.3 It has been suggested that Clarington may be better off with the Commission's proposals of three MPs, rather than any other alternative that would provide fewer. This certainly has some merit and could increase the likelihood that Clarington would have a representative in the Federal Cabinet and more MPs to potentially advocate on its behalf. On the other hand, under such a proposal: • Clarington residents would hold only a minority share of the population of any of these proposed ridings, diluting the ability to influence the local MP to concentrate on and address Clarington residents' interests • the many past and current efforts to create a community identity for Clarington could be undermined • the opportunity for furthering "the Clarington brand" could be lost as the name "Clarington" would not appear in the names suggested by the Commission whereas name recognition would be built with the national media attention using the phrase "the Member for Clarington" • the Municipality and Clarington community organizations would face greater time and complexity when seeking to engage federal representatives (e.g., increased likelihood of having to organize three meetings rather than one) with also the potential for risk of contradictory positions by area MPs where they come from competing political parties • the important rural voice of Clarington farmers would be significantly diluted across three ridings rather than concentrated in one • in the upcoming federal by-election, electors could be confused as to whether they are in an area subject to the by-election or not and federal candidates could be especially challenged in canvassing as they would need to look for support from entirely different groupings of voters between the upcoming by- election and the next regular election. REPORT NO.: CAO-004-12 PAGE 6 6.0 KEY MESSAGES AND KEY PRINCIPLES Pending development of alternate riding boundaries for discussion by council at the October 29th GPA meeting, it is recommended that Clarington use the following three key messages a) Clarington acknowledges that the Commission has a difficult job to do in balancing a range of different criteria in coming up with new riding boundaries b) Clarington is committed to leadership of our community and will work with the Clarington community, the surrounding municipalities and the Commission in developing alternative riding boundaries that: • balances the Commission's criteria • ensures that Clarington has a majority of the share of the population of at least one riding • creates a suitable and feasible result. c) Clarington urges the Commission to recognize the unusual current situation where Clarington, as one of only three ridings in the country that does not currently have a sitting M.P., and therefore the need to ensure manageable change in the boundaries. The aim should be to limit risks to (1) attracting candidates to seek office in the federal by-election to represent the area knowing that their constituency's composition and campaign workers may significantly change and (2) confusion for the voting public in the by-election and the next regular election. The following five principles could guide the alternatives to present to the Commission: i. Where a municipality has a population less than that required to meet the "quota" of 106,000 population, to the extent possible, the municipality should not be divided, but rather the municipality's population and area should be taken "in tact" in forming an electoral boundary ii. the community of interest and identity of communities, an important fabric of what makes our country the envy of the world, should be strengthened and not torn by electoral boundaries. Clarington looks to the Commission to support it and the Clarington community's efforts in building our community identity, efforts that have included: a) Changing the name of the municipality in 1993 to reflect the whole community (with the first part of the name "Clarke Township" combined with the last part of the name "Darlington Township" to create the new name "Clarington".) b) Promoting the establishment and growth of a Board of Trade for the whole of the municipality—the now very successful Clarington Board of Trade - to cover the entire municipality REPORT NO.: CAO-004-12 PAGE 7 c) Community organizations organizing themselves based on Clarington's municipal boundaries, including, Big Brothers and Sisters of Clarington; Clarington Older Adult Association; Clarington Girls Hockey Association; Clarington Toros Minor Hockey Association. d) Community businesses using Clarington in their branding, e.g., Clarington auto dealerships and medical and marketing businesses. iii. Understandability and efficiency for community organizations and the Municipality in dealing with federal matters affecting the community should be advanced by the Commission's work, e.g., federal regulation of the nuclear industry, federal policies on agriculture, trade and waterways, federal funding of infrastructure —to minimize costs and challenges of arranging meetings with multiple local MPs rather than one local MP. iv. Recognition of the historical North/South, rather than East/West orientation of the Clarington and Durham community as reflected in the orientation of the Clarington and Durham municipal electoral wards and in the current federal and provincial riding of"Durham". V. The recognition of the important agriculture component of the Clarington community and the need to maintain a "farm voice" by ensuring that the agricultural community is taken as a whole in forming a riding and not diffused among multiple ridings. 7.0 CONCLUSION 7.1 The Proposed Federal Electoral Boundaries could significantly impact the Municipality and the community. Each has an opportunity to influence the Commission, a body that is authorized to make the final decision after input from the hearings and from current MPs. 7.2 There is no easy solution to addressing this issue. There are several criteria that the Commission will be using to arrive at its final decision, but its desire to seek to create ridings of almost equal population is its primary criteria. When this desire is put up against the diversity in the population size of municipalities in this area of the province, it becomes clear that developing a solution that does not split municipalities will be very challenging. 7.3 However, at this important time in Clarington's history where current and past efforts have positioned it to be on the cusp of significant positive change, the Commission's proposals can be seen not as a problem, but as an opportunity — an opportunity to build the Clarington brand by creating a riding that has the Clarington name in it and that recognizes, in the words of our Vision, a sustainable, creative, caring community. REPORT NO.: CAO-004-12 PAGE 8 7.4 Clarington has been strongly advised by persons knowledgeable of the Commission's workings to be prepared to indicate to the Commission not just its concerns, but to set out alternatives and, importantly, set out in as much detail as possible, including in a map, how other communities would be affected by its alternatives. 7.5 Other riding boundary alternatives will be developed based on the principles set out in this report and will be presented for consideration at the October 29th GPA meeting. The Key Messages contained within this report are recommended to be used to represent the Municipality's position in the interim CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: X Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability X Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure X Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan ATTACHMENT NO. 1 TO REPORT NO.: CAO-004-12 Have Your Say on Proposed Changes in Federal Riding Boundaries The boundaries for federal ridings (electoral districts) are proposed to change significantly for Canadians who call Clarington home. Currently, the whole of the Clarington community is contained within one federal riding called "Durham". (The whole of the Scugog and Uxbridge communities are also joined with Clarington for purposes of this riding boundary.) Under a proposal put forward by the organization authorized to decide on the final riding boundaries—the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Ontario—the Clarington community would be divided among three ridings. For information about these proposed changes and how your voice can be heard by the decision makers, visit www.federal-redistribution.ca or call 1-855-747-7224. Here you'll find details of the proposed federal riding boundaries as well as details about how to register to speak to this Commission. Registration must be made by October 1, 2012, The Municipality of Clarington will be preparing a submission to the Commission. For details about this please contact Curry Clifford in the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer at cclifford @clarington.net or call 905-623-3379extension 2026. Haliburton-Uxbridge ATTACHMENT NO. 2 TO REPORT NO.: CAO-004-12 BWNDORY ROM ¢ ¢ CONCESSION ROAD ID s g Y S i CONCESSION ¢ - OIONA RO DSD EWNpARYROAD g REtlONAL SS S 2 CONCESSION ROwS ¢ ROAD _ CONCESSION ROAD IO MLCOX iuLy 6w ° ROOD Pickering-Brooklin o s 9a REGIONAL ROADS ¢ ¢ CONCESSION ¢ ROwS WELDING ROAC ¢ Ak1ALUN 3 a ¢ S 'CAMBRLUI O _ a & m S TNEMELL ROAD ROA - x D < p CONCESSION RCACI ¢ ¢ CAHLESSION ROADS IS ¢ ¢ S ROAD1 CONCESSION 3 4 s Qshawa-DurhamwluuM zo �xF � { CONCESSION ROAO S 3 • CMCE95ON rmw> . p ^ � q REOIONALROADS (GANMASNAROwI d ^ S o _ 3 REGIONAL ROADO ¢ ¢ p (i'AUNTON ROADS REGIONAL RADI _ & CCONCESSION 13JA°S DADMON ROAD) � s Kawartha Lakes- 0 a s Port Hope- s s PESBLESTONE° ww CONCESSION ROADO CONCESSION ROwO s ¢Cobourc = 3 CONCESSON R°ACS CONCESSION ¢ �y 2 DIRTERY g ¢ Ll Whitby w a DRAGLR 99 p MARn Cw p ! pT " p 'E—ET1 OU O a (-i ANA • � S S GATE ° � n u)raI t ¢ '< S ud _ NOSN ROAD ! CONCESSIONROwS ¢ w+ 6 S T ¢ > a gg ¢ . j w NCESSION ROADO i mOm 5 O+ & CONCESSION ROADA WCNW,Yj ¢ � n Z COWV _ ° LL s Vshawa-BowmanvillV CDNCE59°N RTREET _ CONCESSION �- CONCESSION ROAD] G 8 x 5 g 3 o gg t3 k EASEUNE ROw _ _ _ _ Pj _ Y2 BROWVEW ROw ° NIGNwAY IDl �_S pNEWN -._ _ Z�pS`�P a Y SO— Legend m� -. WGHWAY bI SM1 ° s ¢ s ° ps ¢ CONCESSION ROw t S C� CLARINGTON z 9 ¢ p' 1. G x ¢ D OSHAWA Proposed Federal Ridings AAERNDRE RaD m [� SCUGOG � 3 [� WHITBY g