Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCLD-001-14 Cladyngton REPORT MUNICIPAL CLERK'S DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: January 6, 2014 Resolution#: m Y-/y By-law#: Report#: CLD-001-14 File#: Subject: REGIONAL COUNCIL REPRESENTATION — TOWN OF AJAX PETITION RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CLD-001-14 be received; 2. THAT Council either: a) Support the following resolution of the Town of Ajax: "1. THAT Town of Ajax Council petition the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham to include the following question on the region-wide ballot on October 27, 2014: `Are you in favour of the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham taking all necessary steps to reduce the size of Regional Council by distributing the seats based on the population of each local municipality?' Yes No 2. THAT the Council of the Municipality of Clarington be advised of the support of Ajax and Whitby for a ballot question on representation and that Clarington Council be requested to support a region-wide ballot question on this issue in light of Clarington's significant underrepresentation." OR b) Receive the correspondence from the Town of Ajax for information; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report CLD-001-14 be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: - Reviewed by: k1l Z; Patti ar ' CO oilFranklOWu, Munici Clerk Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 REPORT NO.: CLD-001-14 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND At the Council meeting of December 2, 2013, Council considered the following resolution of the Town of Ajax: "1. THAT Town of Ajax Council petition the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham to include the following question on the region-wide ballot on October 27, 2014: 'Are you in favour of the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham taking all necessary steps to reduce the size of Regional Council by distributing the seats based on the population of each local municipality?' Yes No 2. THAT the Council of the Municipality of Clarington be advised of the support of Ajax and Whitby for a ballot question on representation and that Clarington Council be requested to support a region-wide ballot question on this issue in light of Clarington's significant underrepresentation." In consideration of this matter, the correspondence was referred to staff for a report on the effect that a redistribution of seats will have on Clarington's ward system. 2. REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM The question that the Town of Ajax is asking be placed on the 2014 ballot is: 'Are you in favour of the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham taking all necessary steps to reduce the size of Regional Council by distributing the seats based on the population of each local municipality?' During a special Regional Council meeting in 2011, the Regional Clerk made a presentation on Regional Council Composition. In addressing the issue, she highlighted two scenarios; one utilizing a formula of the Mayor plus one Councillor for every 24,000 eligible electors in the 2010 municipal elections and one based on a formula of the Mayor plus one Councillor for every 35,000 population, with the assumption that each area municipality would be entitled to a minimum of one Regional Councillor in addition to the Mayor. Using the first scenario, Clarington's representation would not change; under the second scenario we would gain one representative (see Attachment No.1). Until such time as we are aware of the number of Regional representatives the Municipality would have, it is premature to make suggestions as to the distribution of them. REPORT NO.: CLD-001-14 PAGE 3 3. PRINCIPLES OF WARD DIVISIONS When reviewing ward boundaries, generally accepted principles are regularly considered, in consideration of past Ontario Municipal Board decisions as well as a Supreme Court of Canada decision, as follows: • Representation by Population: Considering representation by population or every councillor generally representing an equal number of constituents within his or her respective ward. • Population and Electoral Trends: Accommodating for and balancing future increases or decreases in population growth/decline to maintain a general equilibrium in the representation by population standard. • Means of Communication and Accessibility: Arranging ward boundaries by primary and secondary road patterns, railway and public transit accesses, telephone exchanges, postal codes and servicing capabilities to help foster an identity and neighbourhood groupings. • Geographic and Topographical Features: Utilizing geographical and topographical features to provide for ward boundaries and compact and contiguous areas (similar to use of man made features). • Community or Diversity of Interests: Recognizing settlement patterns, traditional neighbourhoods and community groupings (social, historical, economic, religious and political diversities) while at the same time, not fragmenting a community. • Effective Representation: Considering an overriding principle of effective representation. Although one could argue that the most significant is representation by population, a Supreme Court of Canada decision states: "The purpose of the right to vote enshrined in s. 3 of the Charter is not equality of voting power per se but the right to `effective representation'. The right to vote therefore comprises many factors, of which equity is but one. The section does not guarantee equality of voting power." A section of this Supreme Court of Canada decision is included as Attachment No. 2. REPORT NO.: CLD-001-14 PAGE 4 HISTORY OF MUNICIPALITY'S WARD SYSTEM When the Town of Newcastle was created in 1974, it consisted of three wards, being the Former Township of Darlington (Ward 1), the Former Town of Bowmanville (Ward 2) and the Former Township of Clarke (Ward 3). At that time, Regional Council consisted of 30 members plus the Chair; the Town had four Regional representatives. The Mayor sat on Regional Council and each of the wards was represented by a Regional Councillor and a Local Councillor. In 1986, effective for the 1988 elections, one member was added to each of Ajax and Whitby, resulting in a 32-member Council, plus the Chair. In 1996, effective for the 1997 elections, Regional Council was reduced to a 28-member Council and representation of the former Town of Newcastle (now Clarington) was reduced by one member, to two Regional Councillors plus the Mayor. In order to accommodate this reduction, a review of our ward system was undertaken and the Municipality was divided into the current four wards, with one Regional Councillor representing two wards. In reviewing the ward boundaries in 1996, population as well as communities of interest and geographic features were taken into consideration. With the wards being divided as they are, it was believed that each one contained a good mix of rural and urban areas. There has never been an equality of population within the wards and it was known at the time, with the growth that was forecasted for the Municipality, that the populations would become more unbalanced over time. As well, it was recognized at the time that Ward 4 would always have a smaller population base than the other three wards, however, this concern was offset by the fact that the land mass covered was much larger than the other wards. The following table provides a comparison of the wards based on today's electoral count: Ward Electoral Count Land Mass (km2) Ward 1 21,545 129.19 Ward 2 19,097 88.37 Ward 3 12,881 90.27 Ward 4 12,215 304.39 Given the differences in electors in each ward, and the anticipated future growth in the Municipality, it is advisable to review the ward boundaries prior to the 2018 municipal election. REPORT NO.: CLD-001-14 PAGE 5 4. REGIONAL PROCESS Should the Region of Durham decide to place a question on the region-wide ballot on October 27, 2014, the following process will be followed: 1. A report with a recommended date for the holding of a public meeting will be presented to the Finance & Administration Committee and Regional Council in early 2014. 2. The public meeting will be held as part of a regularly scheduled Council meeting, prior to April 30, 2014. The last regularly scheduled Council meeting prior to this date is April 23, 2014 3. The Regional Solicitor will prepare a by-law to authorize the question and include the exact wording of the question. The question must be within the jurisdiction of the municipality; not a matter of provincial interest; must be clear, concise and neutral; and must be capable of being answered in a yes or no format. 4. At least 10 days prior to the passing of the by-law, the Regional Clerk will give notice of Council's intention to pass a by-law to the public and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Notices will be placed in local newspapers and on the Regional website. 5. Regional Council will hold a public meeting and consider a by-law to submit a question to the electors of the Regional Municipality of Durham. A draft by-law will be presented to Council for consideration following the public meeting. 6. Within 15 days of the passing of the by-law, the Regional Clerk will give notice of passing of the by-law to the public and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Notices will be placed in local newspapers and on the Regional website. 7. Within 20 days after the Regional Clerk gives notice of passing of the by-law, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing or any other person or entity may file an appeal on the grounds that: a) the question is not clear, concise and neutral; and/or b) the question is not capable of being answered by a "yes" or "no". If an appeal is received, the Regional Clerk will forward the appeal to the Chief Electoral Officer within 15 days after the last day for filing a notice of appeal and the Chief Electoral Officer, or their designate, will hold a hearing within 60 days of receiving the appeal from the Regional Clerk. REPORT NO.: CLD-001-14 PAGE 6 8. On or before June 2nd the Regional Clerk must transmit a copy of the by-law with the proposed question to the Clerks of the lower-tier municipalities. 9. The Clerks of the lower-tier municipalities are then required to submit the question to the electors on the October 27, 2014 municipal election ballots. 5. CONCURRENCE - Not applicable 6. CONCLUSION The information contained within this report has been prepared as requested by Council to address the ward system within the Municipality of Clarington in consideration of the Town of Ajax's request for a question related to Regional Representation being included on the ballot for the 2014 Municipal Election. It is recommended that Council either: a) Support the following resolution of the Town of Ajax: 1. THAT Town of Ajax Council petition the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham to include the following question on the region-wide ballot on October 27, 2014: `Are you in favour of the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham taking all necessary steps to reduce the size of Regional Council by distributing the seats based on the population of each local municipality?' Yes No 2. THAT the Council of the Municipality of Clarington be advised of the support of Ajax and Whitby for a ballot question on representation and that Clarington Council be requested to support a region-wide ballot question on this issue in light of Clarington's significant underrepresentation." OR b) Receive the correspondence from the Town of Ajax for information. CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN — Not Applicable Staff Contact: Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk Attachments —Attachment No. 1 — Excerpt of Regional Clerk's Presentation Attachment No. 2 — Excerpt of Supreme Court of Canada decision List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Mayor Steve Parish, Town of Ajax Deb Bowen, Regional Clerk, Regional Municipality of Durham Clerks of the Area Municipalities within Durham Region Attachment No. 1 to Report CLD-001-14 Subject: Durham Regional Council - The Need For Fair and Efficient Representation The Re r uai des ruetu c r mi tee Formula spas biased on. represOntaffon.by rirzmber of electors. This as a method by.Which sets are.alloeated in such a way as to vary-with the number of electors and whereas tlie`.high;er the.number of electors in a mun cipality;,the more ' seats:allocated to that xnuni cip:ality. For exampler ut l.izing-a formula of the Mayor plus one Councillor for every 24,000 of eligible electors.in the 2010 municipal elections,the cow position of regional Council would decrease to �7�rie�►ber� plus the Regional.Chair, The following chart outlines the distribution of members by area. municipality based on this formula,with the assumption that each area municipality will be entitled to one Regional Cog.cillor fit addition to the Mayor: 2Q10 Elector 24, Q0 Electors RepfeseritatiQri Change, per.Councillo - AJ 691624 2.9 = 3+Mayor +1 BROCK 10;525 0.4 1+Mayor CLARINGTON 88,628 2.4 2+Mayor . - OSHAWA 110;947 4.6 .5+Mayor -2 PICT<ERING 63;273 2.7 3_+ - SCUGOG 18f433 08 1+Mayor - UXBRIDGE 16,203 0:7 +Mayor WHITBY 32,623. 3:4 3+Mayor DURHAM - 432,256 18.0 19+8.l!14ayors 1 Total-.27 Mesa btr of'Coun.cil Assumptions: i. Alat'oru[each rlreastiunitipalin is amnmlit:r oF'Ite,��onal Council T?aclt;Lca\tucii ralinsu�llltaca:m'tniuiucniaC1Ra&fndcoundUQrtnadditiot ttsthu\fnlor 7 Subject: Durham Regional Council - The Need For Fair and Efficient Representation BYT p1m Em . . . _ Since 2001;the issue of.Council coinposdtion a ld futdie representation has been brought forward se�er�l t��s 1�t these t nm ;the approach of'representatlon by population has been discussed.:,.: Representation by population is a inethod by which seats are allocatedin s-c;;ch.a way as to vary with population. The higher the population of a municipality,the larger the number of seats allocated to that nuns:cipality. The following chart outlines the distribution of our curxent°28 members by�area.mumcipality based on a'formula of the lylayor plus one Coun� ill:or for every 55,QOO po&lation,with the assumption-that each area municipality will be entitled to one Regional Councillor in addition to the T ayor. - R-4 ON''BY POPULAVOK , a 2C?1(l_ 35;000 Populafzon Representation Chat%e.. Population per Councillor A7 USX 110; 5 -32 3+IVtayo 1 .BROCK' 121610 0.4 1+Mayor CLARINGTON 86,495 .2.5 . 3+Mayor +1 OSHAWA 1.52,495 4A 4±Mayor -3 PICKERING 90,765 2.6 3+Mayor SCUGOG 22,700 0.6 1+Mayor- UXBRIDGE 21,405 0.6 1+Maybr - VVEIITBX 124,495 3.6 +IVffayor +1 DURHAM 621,420 17.8 20+8 Mayors ntal-28 Members of Council Assumptions: I. s4latorot caclr iron 1Iunicip ilit .i a memherof]2cingnai Comical Each arcs A-lunicipalitp mill hale a minimum of I ltc&nal Councillor in addition to the\favor 9 Attachment W.eitbf 30 Report CLD-001-14 L 1 '1 Reference re Prov. Electoral Boundaries (Sask. ) , [ 1991 ] 2 SCR 158 Date: 1991-06-06 'Docket: 22345 Parallel 1991 Canl-H 61 (SCC); 81 DLR (4th) 16; [1991] 5 WWR 1; 94 Sask R 161 citations: URL: http://canlii.ca/t/lfsll Citation: Reference re Prov. Electoral Boundaries (Sask.), 1991 Canl-H 61 (SCC), [1991] 2 SCR 158, <http://canlii.ca/t/lfsll> retrieved on 2013-12-18 Print: PDF Format Noteup: Search for decisions citing this decision Reflex Related decisions, legislation cited and decisions cited Record Reference re Prov. Electoral Boundaries(Sask.), [1991] 2 S.C.R. 158 The Attorney General for Saskatchewan Appellant V. Roger Carter, Q.C. Respondent and Attorney General of Canada,Attorney General of Quebec,Attorney General of British Columbia; Attorney General of Prince Edward Island, Attorney General for Alberta,Attorney General of Newfoundland,Minister of Justice of the Northwest Territories,Minister of Justice of the Yukon,John F. Conway,British Columbia Civil Liberties Association,Douglas Billingsley, Wilson McBryan,Leonard Jason,Daniel Wilde, Alberta Association of Municipal Districts & Counties, City of Edmonton, City of Grande Prairie, Equal Justice For All Interveners Indexed as: Reference re Prov.Electoral Boundaries (Sask.) File No.: 22345. 18/12/2013 Page 2 of 30 1991: April 29, 30; 1991: June 6. Present: Lamer C.J, and La Forest, L'Heureux-Dube, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlan, Stevenson and Iacobucci JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for saskatchewan Constitutional law -- Charter of Rights -- Right to vote --Electoral boundaries -- Variances in size of voter populations among constituencies -- Whether Charter right to vote infringed --Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom ss, 1, 3 -- Electoral Boundaries Commission Act, S.S. 1986-87-88, c. E-61, ss. 14, 20. The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, on a reference dealing with the provincial electoral distribution, found that proposed changes to the electoral boundaries infringed s_3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Electoral Boundaries Commission Act imposed a strict quota of urban and rural ridings and required that urban ridings coincide with existing municipal boundaries. The resulting distribution map, unlike the one it replaced,revealed a number of ridings with, variations in excess of 15 percent from the provincial quotient and indicated a problem of under-representation in urban areas. Two questions were stated for the court's opinion. The first queried. whether the variance in the size of voter populations among those constituencies infringed Charter rights guaranteed by the Charter and if so, in what particulars. It also queried whether any such denial of rights was justified by s_I of the Charter. The second queried whether the distribution of those constituencies among urban,rural and northern areas infringed Charter rights and if so, in what particulars were these rights infringed and in what particulars were they justified. This question too queried whether any such denial of rights was justified by s_1 of the Charter. Held (Lamer C.J. and L'Heureux-Dube and Cory JJ. dissenting): The appeal should be allowed. Per La Forest, Gonthier, McLachlan, Stevenson and Iacobucci JJ.: At issue here was whether the variances and distribution reflected in the constituencies themselves violated the Charter guarantee of the right to vote. The validity of The Representation Act, 1989 in so far as it defined the constituencies,was indirectly called into question. The definition of provincial voting constituencies is subject to the Charter and is not a matter of constitutional convention relating to the provincial constitution which is impervious to judicial review. Although legislative jurisdiction to amend the provincial constitution cannot be removed from the province without a constitutional amendment and is in this sense above Charter scrutiny, the provincial exercise of its legislative authority is subject to the Charter. The province is empowered by convention to establish its electoral boundaries but that convention is subject to s_3 of the Charter. 18/12/2013 Page 3 of 30 The content of the Charter right to vote is to be determined in a broad and Purposive way, having regard to historical and social context. The broader philosophy underlying the historical development of the right to vote must be sought and practical considerations, such as social and physical geography, must be borne in mind. The Court, most importantly, must be guided by the ideal of a "free and democratic society" upon which the Charter is founded. The purpose of the right to vote enshrined in s.3 of the Charter is not equality of voting power per se but the right to "effective representation". The right to vote therefore comprises many factors, of which equity is but one. The section does not guarantee equality of voting power. Relative parity of voting power is a prime condition of effective representation. Deviations from absolute voter parity, however, may be justified on the grounds of practical impossibility or the provision of more effective representation. Factors like geography, community history, community interests and minority representation may need to be taken into account to ensure that our legislative assemblies effectively represent the diversity of our social mosaic. Beyond this, dilution of one citizen's vote as compared with another's should not be countenanced. The history or philosophy of Canadian democracy does not suggest that the framers of the Charter in enacting s_3 had the attainment of voter parity as their ultimate goal. Their goal, rather, was to recognize the right long affirmed in this country to effective representation in a system which gives due weight to voter equity but admits other considerations where necessary. Effective representation and good government in this country compel that factors other than voter parity, such as geography and community interests, be taken into account in setting electoral boundaries. Departures from the Canadian ideal of effective representation, where they exist, will be found to violate s_3 of the Charter. The actual allocation of seats between urban and rural areas closely followed the population distribution between those areas and effectively increased the number of urban seats to reflect population increases in urban areas. In general the variations between boundaries in the southern part of the province .appeared to be justifiable on the basis of factors such as geography, community interests and population growth patterns. The northern boundaries were appropriate, given the sparse population and the difficulty of communication in the area. A violation of s. 3 of the Charter.was not established. Per Sopinka J.: The reasons of McLachlin J. were substantially agreed with, although the interpretation of s_3 of the Charter was differently approached. The framers of the Charter did not intend to create a new right and accordingly the primary inquiry was to determine on what principles the right to vote was based. Historically,the drawing of electoral boundaries has been governed by the attempt to achieve voter equality with liberal allowance's for deviations based on the kinds of considerations enumerated in s. 20 of The Electoral Boundaries Commission Act. Deviations were avoided which deprived voters of fair and effective 18/12/2013 Page 4 of 30 representation. Under the Charter, deviations are subjected to judicial scrutiny and must not be such as to deprive voters of fair and effective representation. The Charter guarantee in s. 3 does not extend to the process. The legislature was not required to establish an electoral commission or to ensure that a commission, when established, was able to fulfill its mandate freely without guidelines imposed by the legislature. The constitutional validity of the factors in s. 20 or s. 14 was not at issue but rather the effect that their application produced. The extent of deviation from strict voter equality and the reasons for those deviations were not such as to deny fair and effective representation. Per Lamer C.J. and L'Heureux-Dube and Cory JJ. (dissenting): In Canada, each citizen as a minimum must have the right to vote, to cast that vote in private and to have that vote honestly counted and recorded. Equally important, each vote must be relatively equal to every other vote; there cannot be wide variations in population size among the 64 southern constituencies. Deviations from equality will be permitted where they can be justified as contributing to the better government of the people as a whole, giving due weight to regional issues involving demographics and geography. The restrictions placed on the Electoral Boundaries Commission by The Electoral Boundaries Commission Act were unknown to previous commissions. The electoral map at issue which resulted from the impugned legislation must be considered even if the Charter infringements involved might be thought to be relatively minor. This is because the right to vote is fundamentally important to a democracy and to its citizens. The problems with the impugned distribution were almost entirely a function of the two conditions placed on the Commission by the Act and were unacceptable and, given the eminently fair riding map of the previous distribution, quite unnecessary. The first imposed a strict quota of urban and rural ridings and the second required that the boundaries of the urban ridings coincide with the existing municipal boundaries effectively "quarantining" them from the others. The fundamental importance of the right to vote demands a reasonably strict surveillance of legislative provisions pertaining to elections. Scrutiny unders. 3 attaches not only to the actual distribution in question but also to the underlying process from which the electoral map was derived. .While the actual distribution map may appear to have achieved a result that is not too unreasonable, the effect of the statutory conditions interfered with the rights of urban voters. Once an independent boundaries commission is established, it is incumbent on the legislature to ensure that the Commission was able to fulfill its mandate freely and without unnecessary interference. The right to vote is so fundamental that this interference is sufficient to constitute a breach of s. 3 of the Charter. The creation of the two northern ridings met all the requisite conditions of the Oakes test and was justified under s. 1 of the Charter. Geography and demography 18/12/2013 Page 5 of 30 demonstrated a pressing and substantial need and the creation of these constituencies was rationally connected to the concept that they have effective representation. The southern ridings were in a different position legally and geographically. While the differing representational concerns of urban and rural areas may properly be considered in drawing constituency boundaries, the voter population of each constituency should be approximately equal and the type of mandatory conditions imposed here are therefore precluded. Given the initial premise of equality, the Commission should be free to consider such factors as geography, demography and communities of interest in drawing constituency boundaries and allocating ridings between. rural and urban areas. No explanation was given why the balancing of relevant factors could not be left to the Commission and instead had to be mandated by the legislature. The less equitable distribution that resulted because of these legislatively mandated conditions was, absent a reasonable .explanation, suspect. There was no basis for concluding that the legislature's objective in imposing these conditions was pressing and substantial. Even assuming a pressing and substantial need, the legislation did not affect the rights of urban voters as little as possible. Earlier and more equitable distributions indicated that the rights of urban voters could be interfered with to a lesser extent.