Township of West Lincoln
2016 Ward Boundary Review
Discussion Paper
May 2016
Prepared by
Dr. Robert J. Williams
Waterloo, Ontario
Table of Contents
Introduction
1. Background
2. What Is a Ward Boundary Review?
3. Why a Ward Boundary Review in 2016?
4. Framing the 2016 Ward Boundary Review
a. Representation by population
b. Protection of communities of interest and neighbourhoods
c. Use of natural physical features or natural barriers as boundaries
d. Variations in population density
e. Future population growth projections
f. Development of a ward structure . . . for at least 3 Municipal Elections
g. An effective and equitable system of representation
h. The composition/size of Council
5. The Process
6. Evaluating the Status Quo
a. Preliminary Considerations
i. Composition of Council
ii. Wards or At-large?
iii. One-Member or Two-Member Wards
iv. Population Figures
b. Applying the Principles to the Present Wards
Summary Assessment: Present Wards
7. Some Alternatives
i. Option A
ii. Option B
iii. Option C
iv. Option D
8. Conclusions
Appendix A
Appendix B
1
2
2
3
5
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
9
10
10
10
11
12
13
14
17
18
20
22
24
26
28
29
29
Introduction
This report is intended to take West Lincolnʼs 2016 Ward Boundary Review
(WBR) to its next stage. Early in 2016, I began assembling background
information on West Lincoln, drove many of the local roads to familiarize myself
with various settlements areas and landmarks and met with elected officials and
Township staff. That research has been used to evaluate the present system of
representation in West Lincoln and to frame the alternative approaches to
configuring the Townshipʼs electoral system that appear in the following pages.
The Discussion Paper serves as a resource to be used by the public and by
Council to participate in this Review. Three public meetings will be held in June
where these Options will be explained and where the community can evaluate
their suitability. Individuals and community organizations are also invited to
forward comments before July 15, 2106 directly to the Consultant at
bwilliams@westlincoln.ca. At that time, community feedback will be considered in
the preparation of a final report to Council due around the end of September.
Council will make the final selection of a ward configuration soon after that.
For practical assistance so far in this Review, I would like to acknowledge and
thank members of the Townʼs staff, in particular Carolyn Langley, Joanne Scime,
JacquieThrower, Brian Treble and Lauren Vraets and also Greg Bowie of Niagara
Region.
Robert J. Williams
Robert J. Williams, Ph.D.
Consultant
2016 Township of West Lincoln
Ward Boundary Review
2
1. Background
In 1970, the Townships of South Grimsby, Caistor, and Gainsborough were
amalgamated to form the Township of West Lincoln, a lower-tier municipality
within the Regional Municipality of Niagara. The legislation establishing Niagara
Region stipulated that the council of the Township would be composed of a
Mayor “elected by general vote” and (in the language of the day) “six aldermen
elected by wards.” (Regional Municipality of Niagara Act, Section 3 (1) 12). The
Mayor would represent the Township on Niagara Regional Council.
The six Councillors (in todayʼs language) were elected in wards that adhered to
the boundaries of the three pre-amalgamation municipalities with each ward
electing two representatives. West Lincoln Council discussed the possibility of
changing this arrangement in 1997 (about twenty years ago) but no action was
taken. As a result, the 1970 ward boundaries are still operative.
The 2016 Ward Boundary Review has been initiated to determine whether the
original ward configuration provides effective and equitable representation to the
residents of West Lincoln.
2. What Is a Ward Boundary Review?
Despite the fact that the political representation in Canada is primarily organized
around geographic areas (known as a “constituency” at the federal and provincial
levels and usually as a “ward” at the municipal level), Ontarioʼs Municipal Act is
strangely silent on essential features of the municipal system of representation.
The Act merely authorizes a lower-tier municipality to determine the “composition
of council” (that is, the size of council) (Section 217) and “to divide or redivide the
municipality into wards or to dissolve the existing wards” (Section 222 (1)).
Section 217 includes some conditions related to the offices to be filled and
Section 222 adds some procedural requirements related to notification and
possible appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) of any by-law passed
under that section.
Ontario legislation does not provide for a regular review of municipal
representation arrangements nor does it spell out the process through which
such a review might occur. Furthermore, despite a misleading reference in the
Municipal Act that the Minister “may prescribe criteria,” none actually exist.1 It is
1
Before amendments to the Municipal Act in 2006, Section 222 (2) of the
Municipal Act stipulated that before passing a by-law the municipality shall “(b)
have regard to criteria for establishing ward boundaries prescribed by the
Minister.” The present clause on Ministerial criteria (Section 222 (10)) refers back
to a subsection on potential conflicts between the by-law and provincial
legislation, not one dealing with process or principles. In fact, the Minister of
3
therefore up to each municipal council to set the terms of reference for a review,
including the process to be followed, and, ideally, to establish criteria or guiding
principles that can be used to evaluate the municipalityʼs electoral system. West
Lincoln Council has, in fact, adopted a process and a set of guiding principles for
this review that will be discussed below.2 Without such provisions in place there
is a risk that an electoral review may lead to unfair, ill-conceived or politically
motivated results.
A ward boundary review, then, is a task designed to assist Council in reaching a
determination on an arrangement that provides effective representation through
an electoral structure sensitive to the geographic distribution of the inhabitants of
the municipality. Since the Township is already divided into wards, the starting
point is to assess the present wards in terms of the six guiding principles adopted
by Council to be discussed below and to develop and evaluate possible
alternatives to “redivide” the municipality. To ensure the review is
comprehensive, it will also consider the elimination of wards altogether and a
change in the number of Councillors.
Given the primary importance of the electoral structure to those presently holding
public office in the Township, a review that would be considered acceptable by
the community (and by the OMB in the event of an appeal) must be conducted
for the municipality by someone who is not a member of Council or a municipal
employee. An independent consultant retained by the Township will therefore
undertake West Lincolnʼs Ward Boundary Review and will follow a process that
was approved by Council before the review began.3
3. Why a Ward Boundary Review in 2016?
Since one fundamental principle of Canadian electoral democracy is that each
elected official in a particular jurisdiction should represent approximately the
same number of people, the present arrangements in West Lincoln are
problematic.
The population of the Township has increased since amalgamation but that
growth has tended to cluster in a particular part of the Township; as a result, there
Municipal Affairs and Housing has never issued criteria related to municipal
representation arrangements.
2
Clerkʼs Report RFD-C-02-2016 (January 18, 2016) spells out the process
for the review and a set of guiding principles for the electoral system.
3
report.
A summary of the consultantʼs qualifications is found in Appendix B of this
4
is today an imbalance in the population of the three wards. This is not a new
development. Data presented to West Lincoln Council in 1997 (based on the
1994 Ontario Population Report) shows the following significant disparity: 4
Ward
One
Two
Three
Total
Total Population
2,678
3,672
4,710
11,050
Percentage
24
33
43
100
By the time of the 2011 federal census, the disparity in the population across the
three wards had increased proportionately:
Ward
One
Two
Three
Total
Total Population
2,840
4,412
6,585
13,837
Percentage
21
32
47
100
With the recent confirmation by the OMB of an expanded urban boundary for
Smithville, most residential development in the Township will occur in the present
Ward Three, already the largest ward in terms of population. Furthermore,
between now and 2026, the population of Smithville is forecast to grow to the
point where it will likely be larger than “rural” West Lincoln in its entirety. It is
therefore appropriate that the issue of “representation by population” be revisited.
Notwithstanding this evidence, some Councilllors insist that there is “nothing
broken” in the present system so “donʼt change it” or that change is not needed
because “people are comfortable” with the present system or that this review is
“premature.” From this perspective, inertia serves to justify a representation
system rooted firmly in the past rather than one based on the present or the
future of West Lincoln.
It is, of course, within the power of this Council to choose to maintain the present
ward configuration. Put another way, though, everyone should be confident that
the merits of the status quo actually outweigh its shortcomings and that none of
the alternatives that arise in this review successfully address such shortcomings.
4
Report RFD-C-2.97 (January 27, 1997), page 4
5
4. Framing the 2016 Ward Boundary Review
The requirement to undertake a ward boundary review in Ontario and to follow a
prescribed process are not established in legislation or by regulation, so each
municipal council retains complete discretion on when and how a review will
operate. However, many municipal electoral system reviews have been
undertaken in Ontario over the last decade and a half that offer examples of
successful processes and principles; a few others have been subject to an OMB
hearing and were found wanting in some respect. The recommendations made
by the Township Clerk in her report RFD-C-02-2016 for terms of reference for a
review and guiding principles to use in evaluating alternative electoral
arrangements that may emerge from the Review are drawn from such
experiences.
The initial phase of the WBR consisted of background research on the Township,
such as its demographic and land-use patterns, planning forecasts, component
communities and their history and the operation of the present ward system.
Research on models of representation in other comparable Ontario
municipalities, as well as pertinent decisions by the Ontario Municipal Board on
appeals pertaining to electoral representation, were necessary to place the
situation in West Lincoln into context.
The most significant part of the “framework” for the Review, however, is the
requirement that it “should be conducted in consideration of” a number of guiding
principles ”in order to provide an effective and equitable system of
representation.”5
The specific guiding principles to be “considered” are the following:
• representation by population;
• protection of communities of interest and neighbourhoods;
• use of natural physical features or natural barriers as boundaries where
possible;
• variations in population density;
• future population growth projections;
• development of a ward structure that will accommodate growth and
population shifts for at least three (3) Municipal Elections (2018, 2022,
2026).
There is the additional statement that the “review process may generate
discussions and/or a review relating to the composition/size of Council.”
It is helpful to clarify the way these principles and related directions to the
consultant will be understood in this Review. Some of the stated principles
5
Clerkʼs Report RFD-C-02-2016 (January 18, 2016). See also Appendix A.
6
embody concepts that need to be explained, not all of which may be met
successfully in each design. Readers should also be cautioned that only a perfect
electoral design – in a perfect world - is likely to meet all of these principles
literally or uniformly.
a. Representation by population
The concept of representation by population (“rep by pop”) has a long history in
Canada, usually associated with the idea that elective offices in a particular
jurisdiction are distributed in such a way that each one is associated with roughly
the same number of people or of electors. This is sometimes referred to as “one
vote, one value” or as the "one person - one vote" principle. In some democracies
this principle of voter parity is enforced rigorously - almost to the exclusion of any
other factor – so that there is almost no variation in the size of electoral units
within that jurisdiction.
In a ward boundary review, the goal is to design wards at the “optimal” size for
the municipality; an optimal ward is one in which the population is within five
percent of the number derived by dividing the overall population by the number of
wards. In the most significant judicial ruling on electoral representation in
Canada, however, the majority of the Supreme Court understood that Canadian
electoral law has never been driven by the need to achieve “full parity” in the
population of electoral divisions.6 The Court concluded that some degree of
variation from parity would be acceptable and, at times, even necessary to achieve
effective representation (a concept that will be discussed below). In other words,
representation should at least be equitable (that is, fair) when it cannot be
mathematically equal.
The extent of variation that will be considered acceptable in this review will be 25%
above or below the population of what will be called an optimal ward in West
Lincoln. This is a rather generous range of tolerance from parity but is based on
long-standing parameters for the federal redistribution process and will be
discussed again below.
The rep by pop principle is a fundamental aspiration in this review but will not be
the single priority in the design of wards.
b. Protection of communities of interest and neighbourhoods
If the representation by population principle (and others in this list) places
emphasis on the equitable representation of people, this principle encourages an
equitable representation of place. It recognizes that West Lincoln is composed of
6
Reference re: Provincial Electoral Boundaries (Saskatchewan) [1991] 2
S.C.R. 158. This is often cited as the Carter decision.
7
a number of identifiable communities or neighbourhoods and that political
representation must be sensitive to them.
As such, ward boundaries should not divide traditional neighbourhoods and
communities of interest within West Lincoln and should aim to keep each existing
settlement area within one ward. Furthermore, rural businesses represent a
major economic community of interest within the Township and must be given
proper consideration in the design of a ward system, especially in the light of the
growth of the urban population of Smithville.
Another important question in the application of this principle cannot be ignored:
after more than forty years as an amalgamated municipality, to what extent do
the three pre-amalgamation townships still constitute meaningful communities of
interest for electoral purposes? The present ward system, after all, still uses
those pre-amalgamation boundaries.
c. Use of natural physical features or natural barriers as boundaries where
possible
Ward boundaries should make use of permanent features of the natural
environment rather than create new, perhaps artificial, lines that may not be
easily identified or widely understood by residents.
d. Variations in population density
One of the realities of human settlement in Canada is that the population is not
spread uniformly across the landscape. A key consideration in the reasoning
behind the Carter decision (see note 6) was the challenge inherent in designing a
system of representation where there are areas of relatively sparse population
within the same jurisdiction as areas with comparatively dense population.
This principle is an explicit direction to give consideration to this pattern of
settlement in West Lincoln and is a reinforcement of the idea that “rep by pop” in
Canada is built on relative, not absolute, parity.
e. Future population growth projections
The implementation of changes to ward boundaries in West Lincoln in 2016 will
see proposals for new electoral units based on some empirical certainty about
population changes that have occurred since 1970. This principle seeks to have
ward designs that do not merely “catch up” with such changes but address the
municipalityʼs future by giving some weight to projected population growth within
the Township. In other words, it encourages the design of wards that will not be
out-of-date the day after they are adopted.
8
f. Development of a ward structure that will accommodate growth and
population shifts for at least three (3) Municipal Elections
This principle makes the previous one more explicit by establishing a potential
timetable for the use of any new wards adopted in 2016. That is, the electoral
system should include wards that are able to absorb increases in population
without returning to an unacceptable imbalance in ward populations over the next
three municipal elections.
The principle also implicitly confirms that West Lincolnʼs ward boundaries should
be subject to regular reviews (that is, after the 2026 municipal election at the
latest but sooner if ward populations become progressively more imbalanced).
Ward boundaries are shaped by the size and distribution the Townshipʼs
population - a dynamic attribute. As such, this principle recognizes that the
“products” of the 2016 ward boundary review will have a limited shelf life, so to
speak.
g. An effective and equitable system of representation
A statement that the guiding principles are presented “in order to provide an
effective and equitable system of representation” prefaces the list of specific
principles that have just been explained. The various principles on the list are
largely directed towards the goal of providing more “equitable” representation.
But what is “effective” representation?
The concept of effective representation has become an integral part of the
evaluation of electoral systems in Canada, dating from a reference taken to the
Supreme Court of Canada in 1991 (see note 6). The Court was asked to
determine whether the variance in the size of voter populations permitted in
legislation for certain types of provincial constituencies in Saskatchewan (in
urban, rural and northern areas) infringed on the democratic right found in section
3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“Every citizen of Canada has
the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a
legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein”).
The majority opinion concluded that 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 ʻeffective
representationʼ.” It went on to state that since the purpose of a vote is to be
represented in government (and not just to be able to cast a ballot on election
day), “to insist on voter parity might deprive citizens with distinct interests of an
effective voice in the legislative process as well as of effective assistance from
their representatives in their ʻombudsmanʼ role.”7 This may mean that, at times,
7
Reference re: Provincial Electoral Boundaries (Saskatchewan) (1991) at
page 37.
9
voter parity may “prove undesirable because it has the effect of detracting from
the primary goal of effective representation” and deviations from parity “may be
justified on the grounds of practical impossibility or the provision of more effective
representation.”8
In the West Lincoln ward boundary review, effective representation will serve as
a kind of summary evaluation of wards (and the ward system itself) built around
the previous six principles. For example, are the individual wards proposed for
West Lincoln plausible and coherent units of representation? Do they provide
equitable access to councillors for all residents of the municipality? Are the
proposed wards of a size, scale and shape that a representative can serve her or
his constituents successfully? In sum, do the wards constitute a system that can
be judged to deliver effective representation even if some of the specific
principles are only partially successful?
h. The composition/size of Council
As noted earlier, the report adopted by Council to initiate this ward boundary
review included the statement that the “review process may generate discussions
and/or a review relating to the composition/size of Council.”
This aspect of representation is actually handled in a different part of the
Municipal Act from the one dealing with wards. The pertinent parts of Section 217
“authorize a local municipality to change the composition of its council” subject to
a number of rules related to the minimum size of council (five members, one of
whom shall be the head of council) and methods of election (“the head of council
shall be elected by general vote” and the remaining members “shall be elected by
general vote or wards or by any combination of general vote and wards.”).
The section also prohibits the local municipality from changing its representation
on “the council of an upper-tier municipality” in which it is located. Finally, actions
taken under section 217 are not subject to appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board
(while those taken in relation to section 222 are open to appeal).
Like section 222, section 217 of the Municipal Act provides no directions to
municipalities for addressing the composition question other than the
requirements just noted. There is no consensus or guideline about how large a
municipal council should be in Ontario. As such, any decision about establishing
the size of West Lincoln Council is entirely at the discretion of that Council based
on whatever principles it may wish to apply. Logically, a ward boundary review
would follow any decision under section 217 since the initial step would be to
8
Reference re: Provincial Electoral Boundaries (Saskatchewan) (1991) at
page 33.
10
determine how many seats are to be filled on West Lincoln Council before
designing the basis for doing so.
5. The Process
While there is no longer a statutory requirement that electors be involved with a
ward boundary review through a public meeting or other activity, consultation is
still essential for the review process to be legitimate and successful and will be
undertaken in West Lincoln through a number of mediums and forums.
The primary goal is to ensure that members of the public are provided with
opportunities to offer suggestions and to consider and provide comments on the
options presented. The current members of Council should not be seen as
having control over the development of alternative systems, although they were
interviewed in the early stages of the review process as part of the necessary
background research on West Lincoln and on the way the present system works.
A dedicated webpage was operational on the Township website from early April
with background information about the Review and other resources to assist
those who wish to participate in the review in some way. Three consultation
sessions will be held, at the following locations:
• Caistor Community Centre
• Wellandport Community Centre
• Township of West Lincoln Council Chambers, Smithville
Those in attendance at the meetings will be invited to complete a survey on the
present and future ward boundaries for the Township. The same instrument will
also be available on the Township website until mid-July. An e-mail address has
also been created to allow individuals to convey perspectives on the ward
boundary review directly to the consultant at <bwilliams@westlincoln.ca>.
Feedback from the community that is collected from those consultations will be
used in the development of the final report to go to Council in the fall of 2016.
6. Evaluating the Status Quo
a. Preliminary Considerations
i. Composition of Council
West Lincoln Council considered the option of changing its composition in
January 1997 (see note 4) when Council received a staff report on the subject
from S. A. Hayden, Director of Corporate Services, in response to initiatives by
the Provincial government of the day to encourage local councils “to reduce the
number of politicians even if restructuring does not occur within a particular
municipality.” Among the options presented to Council were three that each
would see the number of Councillors reduced from six to four (taking Council to
11
the minimum size permitted by legislation).
Council defeated a motion to adjust the number of wards (to four) and to reduce
the size of the council (to four) and instead determined that no further action be
taken on the matter. The question has not been placed before Council since that
time.
The initial consultations and research for this Review have revealed no
widespread sentiment to increase or decrease the size of Council from the
present seven members (the Mayor and six Councillors). Unless residents
express solid and reasoned arguments for a change during the public
consultation phase of the review, the ward boundary review will continue on the
basis that the present composition of council will be preserved.
ii. Wards or At-large?
The Municipal Act, as noted earlier, provides the opportunity for a municipality “to
divide or redivide the municipality into wards or to dissolve the existing wards.”
Like other matters addressed in this Review, there are no conditions or
constraints imposed by the Province to help formulate a local decision to
“dissolve” wards in favour of an at-large (or general vote) system.
Ward systems were frequently established at amalgamation to provide some
continuity (as well as softening the change) even though the overall population in
many municipalities was relatively small. By 2016, representation by ward is
taken to be the norm in West Lincoln but in a comprehensive electoral review like
this, it should not be taken as permanent or inevitable. At the risk of
oversimplifying the arguments on either side, some important considerations can
be noted:
In an at-large system (that is, with no wards) certain advantages can be
anticipated:
• electors have greater choice and flexibility in elections (each voter has the
opportunity to consider every candidate in the council election);
• electors are able to select the candidates they think will do the best job, rather
than having to make a choice among candidates who happen to run in their
ward;
• residents will have a larger number of councillors to approach with their
concerns;
• the system promotes the concept of a Township-wide focus, with councillors
being elected by and concerned for the Township as a whole, rather than
attending to more parochial interests;
• the likelihood of acclamations is reduced.
Some disadvantages can be anticipated in an at-large system:
12
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
candidates must campaign across the entire municipality; this may make cost
of a campaign prohibitive (especially for newcomers);
there would be no designated voices for particular communities or
neighburhood (can [should?] all councillors be well-informed about all
“neighbourhood” issues?);
candidates who appeal to areas where voter turnout highest tend to be
elected disproportionately;
at-large elections can lead to significant communities of interest and points of
view being unrepresented (or underrepresented);
the system can lead to councillors being relatively inaccessible for residents
of some parts of the Township;
the format can lead to confusion of responsibilities and duplication of effort on
the part of councillors (everybody on Council represents everybody in the
municipality);
large numbers of candidates on the ballot can be confusing for voters.
Whatever the merits of an at-large format for electing Councillors, such a system
would make it difficult to protect the distinctive communities of interest within
West Lincoln Township - especially as the urban-rural population ratio continues
to change over the next few years. Unless residents express solid and reasoned
arguments for a change to an at-large system during the public consultation
phase of the review, this review will assume that West Lincolnʼs council will
continue to be elected in wards.
iii. One-Member or Two-Member Wards
West Lincolnʼs Council has operated on a two-member model since
amalgamation in 1970. By now it is “the natural way” to think about
representation in the Township. However, the January 1997 composition of
council report (see note 4) and motions placed before Council at that time not
only proposed a reduction in the absolute number of Councillors, but also
envisioned four single-member wards. The idea of single-member wards was
also raised in interviews with elected officials in April.
The choice between two-member and one-member wards reflects certain
expectations and understandings about how representation works. Each
councillor is “responsible” for all residents of a ward whether there are two
councillors elected or only one. Even so, defenders of two-member wards
normally frame their assessment in terms of sharing workload between the two
councillors: residents have more than one person to contact, one councillor can
cover for the other when one is unavailable and the ward has two voices to be
heard on matters of importance to the ward. Critics of the system suggest that it
often leads to duplication of effort (citizens may contact both councillors about an
issue and each one engages staff in pursuing the matter) or that political realities
(that is, re-election) eventually turn many ward colleagues into rivals. In some
13
cases, the two voices may not always agree on what is best for the Ward or the
municipality, effectively cancelling out one anotherʼs vote.
Most defenders of the single-member system frame their assessment in terms of
accountability: at election time, electors have one person to focus on for praise or
blame. There is no buck-passing or “free riding.” On the other hand, there is a
greater possibility of acclamations with only a single seat to fill.
The pertinent point here is that opting for one model or the other is an
acceptance of the strengths and weaknesses inherent in each one. There is no
“right” or “wrong” format to elect councillors.
One practical consideration, however, tilts the balance towards retaining twomember wards in West Lincoln: the scale and distinctiveness of Smithville within
the Township. That is, can the six guiding principles for the review still be met
while either incorporating the population of Smithville into a single one-member
ward or by carving Smithville in half to make two plausible one-member wards?
Either choice is probably significantly weaker than models based on two-member
wards.
Once again, unless residents express solid and reasoned arguments for a
change to one-member wards during the public consultation phase, this review
will assume that West Lincolnʼs council will be elected in two-member wards.
iv. Population Figures
The starting point for the Carter case was the interpretation of a citizenʼs right to
vote. The written Court decision itself, though, shifted the focus to the concept of
representation, a relationship that does not just apply to citizens or electors but to
all residents. Furthermore, since 1867, federal electoral redistributions have been
tied to the Census, a measurement of the overall population not of citizens. On
these grounds, among others, ward boundary reviews should be built upon
population figures, not the number of electors.
However, It has proven to be difficult to obtain reliable up-to-date population
figures for West Lincoln. The most recent independent source for population data
is the 2011 Census of Canada, which is a flawed foundation for this purpose for a
number of reasons, not the least being the accuracy of data that can be attached
authoritatively to small (and especially rural) geographic areas.
Requests were made to Niagara Region planning staff for assistance in compiling
data that can be associated with the present wards as well as the Options that
appear later in this report. It was necessary to work with what are called
14
Dissemination Blocks9 to come up with an estimate of the population in 2011 and
these are the population figures used here. The 2016 Census took place while
this Report was being prepared but fresh population data will not be available for
this WBR; in any case, it is highly likely that it will confirm the long-term
population growth patterns. In passing, it can be confirmed that elector counts
from the 2014 municipal election closely parallel the pattern that emerges from
the overall population figures reported in the next section.10
b. Applying the Principles to the Present Wards
The next section of the report will apply the guiding principles to the present ward
configuration both to illustrate the application of the guiding principles and to help
assess the continuing viability of the status quo. Map 1 showing the present
wards and their estimated 2011 populations is provided below for reference.
Map 1: Township of West Lincoln Wards and Population
9
Dissemination Blocks are geographic areas used by Statistics Canada to collect
population and dwelling counts in the Census that are then aggregated for other
purposes. An explanation of Dissemination Blocks is provided at
https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/ref/dict/geo014-eng.cfm
10
Clerkʼs Report RFD-C-02-2016 (January 18, 2016), page 3.
15
Representation by population
To determine whether the present wards meet the “rep by pop” principle, a
simple code can be applied to establish how close to optimal each ward is, as
shown in the following table:
Representation by Population Codes
Label
Description
Code
OR+
Greater than 25% above the optimal size
O+
Outside the Range:
Above
Above Optimal
O
Optimal
Within 5% above or below the optimal size
O-
Below Optimal
6% to 25% below the optimal size
OR-
Outside the Range:
Below
Greater than 25% below the optimal size
6% to 25% above the optimal size
Based on the last definitive figures available (the 2011 Census), West Lincolnʼs
population was estimated at 13,837; with three wards, the optimal size of a ward
would have been 4,612 with a generous range of variation between 3,459 and
5,765 to take account of population density and clustering. In the chart below, the
third column shows the variance between each present ward and that optimal
value and the fourth column is the code that describes the relationship to that
optimal value (as just discussed).
Ward
One
Two
Three
Total
Population Variance in Present Wards
Population
Optimal
Variance
Code
(2011)
Population
2,840
4,612
0.62
OR4,412
4,612
0.96
O
6,585
4,612
1.43
OR +
13,837
Clearly these data confirm that distribution of population across the three wards
is not balanced and that two of the wards fail to meet the “rep by pop” principle,
one over the range and one under the range. This is not a defensible situation
and would not likely be tolerated as an acceptable distribution of population in an
Ontario Municipal Board hearing.
Protection of communities of interest and neighbourhoods
The present ward system in West Lincoln does not divide any of the many small
hamlets spread across the Township. Even the former rural cluster at Winslow,
sitting along the former Caistor-Gainsborough township boundary (the present
16
Ward One – Ward Two boundary) appears to be entirely in Ward 2. The major
exception is Smithville: most of the community is located in Ward 3 but the
growing Alma Estates residential area is located in Ward 2. As well, despite the
broad similarity of agricultural enterprises across the Township, rural interests are
significant in the three wards but are divided into three parts.
Use of natural physical features or natural barriers as boundaries where
possible
There are few natural features that could have served as ward boundaries in
West Lincoln, although a portion of the old South Grimsby-Caistor boundary
followed Twenty Mile Creek and has served as a ward boundary since
amalgamation. Given the rather meandering nature of Twenty Mile Creek on the
west side of the Township, this natural feature has actually proven to be
confusing boundary to candidates and residents.
The wards are largely bounded by road delineations that have become almost
“natural” because of their historic status (the very names attached to CaistorGainsborough Townline and the Townline Road section of Twenty Mile Road
embody these customary perspectives).
Variations in population density
This principle indirectly addresses the diversity of residential patterns across the
Township – from active agricultural areas with low population density spread over
a large area to several small- to moderate-sized residential settlement areas
(less than 500 people) to the growing concentration of suburban life-style
neighbourhoods in Smithville. However, the present wards do not accommodate
variations in population density.
The current ward boundaries treat all of these types of communities the same
way – the norm is a large sparsely populated rural area surrounding population
clusters of varying sizes. There is no question that agriculture is a significant part
of the West Lincoln identity and its prosperity but this should not override the
legitimate expectation that the urban concentration should also be included in
solving the representation puzzle.
Future population growth projections
Every population analysis covering the last twenty years or more and every
forecast for West Lincoln for the next twenty years identifies Smithville as the
undisputed driver of population change. It is not inconceivable that as much as
90% of the growth in West Lincolnʼs population by 2026 will go to the present
Ward 3 and that by 2031 more than half of the Townshipʼs population will reside
within the Smithville urban boundary as presently defined. As observed already,
leaving the present wards in place during this growth will not see the system of
17
representation correct itself. The present wards do not meet the population
growth principle.
Development of a ward structure that will accommodate growth and
population shifts for at least three (3) Municipal Elections
With a disproportionate concentration of West Lincolnʼs forecast growth in
Smithville over the next ten years, it is highly improbable that the present ward
configuration can be justified in principle as the basis for electing West Lincolnʼs
council for the next election – let alone the next three.
An effective and equitable system of representation
The assessment provided so far demonstrates conclusively that West Lincolnʼs
present ward system is not equitable. But is it effective?
The present Ward 3 is not a coherent unit of representation in the sense that it
combines the Townshipʼs major population centre with a sizeable rural area.
Depending on the participation of electors in Smithville in subsequent elections,
the effective representation of this segment of West Lincolnʼs rural voice will be
routinely weakened. Rural residents in the present Ward 3 have more in common
with the residents of Ward 1 than with the majority of the present Ward 3
population. Future population growth in the Alma Estates area is not likely to
surpass the rural population of Ward 2 but will in time have an impact on the
coherence of the ward. These features are beginning to hamper effective
representation in West Lincoln today.
Access to municipal representatives is partly related to population numbers but
also to the scale of the wards: maintaining personal contact with elected officials
is more manageable for the majority of residents in the present Ward 3 than in
the other two wards. In the two predominantly rural wards, personal access is
inherently different because of the distances involved and the lower population
density. However, not only are both Wards 1 and 2 significantly larger than Ward
3, Ward 2 is about twenty percent larger in area than Ward 1 and home to a third
as many more people. This combination weakens effective representation for
about one third of the Townshipʼs population.
Summary Assessment: Present Wards
Guiding Principle
Population
Community of Interest
Natural Boundaries
Variations in Density
Population Growth
Three Election
Effective Representation
Meets Expectations?
No
Mixed
No
Mixed
No
No
Mixed
18
7. Some Alternatives
A successful ward system design will be one that offers a combination of features
consistent with the guiding principles. It is also possible to have more than one
design that will capture a satisfactory balance of these principles.
Four Options are provided here for consideration as alternatives to the present
ward system. Conceptually, each is a two-member three-ward design and each
includes a proposed Ward 3 based on the Smithville urban boundary and some
territory surrounding it, plus two largely rural wards containing several small
settlement areas. There is an implicit over-representation of the rural areas of
West Lincoln that inevitably results from a three-ward configuration. No
boundaries encroach on established settlements and most follow familiar
roadways. This arrangement can create occasional “community of interest”
inconsistencies where neighbouring homes or businesses facing each other may
be in different wards but it is “cleaner” than trying to use, for example, property
lines. The natural features principle is not applicable as usually understood.
There are four primary features that may be tweaked within a single proposed
Option or blended into a new variation that could be consistent with the guiding
principles.
• First is the western boundary of Ward 3 that in Options A, B and C begins at
Grimsby Centre and ends somewhere along Sixteen Road. In Option D the
western boundary uses South Grimsby Road 8 but ends in the same general
area.
• The second is the southeastern boundary of Ward 3 that follows Paterson
Road and the present Ward 2 – Ward 3 boundary in Options A, B and C to
the West Lincoln-Lincoln municipal boundary and the Option D version that
uses Regional Road 27 to Twenty Mile Road and on to the West LincolnLincoln municipal boundary.
• The third feature is the proposed boundary between Wards 1 and 2 that
maintains the present boundary along the Caistor-Gainsborough Townline in
Options B and D or shifts it west to Smithville and Church Roads or east to
Port Davidson Road in Options A and C respectively.
• Option D proposes a rural corridor to the north of Smithville at Young Street
but such an arrangement involves trading off the inclusion of those rural
residents in an urban-dominated ward (as in Options A, B and C) or adding
territory to a rural ward that is not obviously connected to the rest of the ward.
Clearly moving any of these particular lines will have some impact on the
distribution of population among the three wards and possibly on the capacity of
the ward to provide effective representation. However, the specific lines used for
19
boundaries are secondary to the selection of a design that best meets the guiding
principles.
In the summary evaluations that follow, an Option that includes any ward outside
the range of variation is normally considered to have failed categorically to meet
the population principle. As it turns out, all four Options have failed to meet the
“rep by pop” principle to some degree. A more flexible evaluation is obviously
necessary to evaluate these proposed Options in West Lincoln.
20
i. Option A
Map 2: Option A Proposed Wards and Population Estimates
Ü
Township of West Lincoln
Ward Boundary Review - OPTION 'A'
N.T.S.
Ward Three
Population = 6016
Ward One Population = 4010
Ward Two Population = 3811
Legend
Option A - Proposed Ward Boundaries
Smithville Urban Boundary
Road Network
May 2016: The Township of West Lincoln
The information depicted on this map has been compiled from various sources and is for illustrative purposes only.
Features:
• Two proposed rural wards reasonably balanced in area and population
• Proposed Wards 1 and 2 coherent, proposed Ward 3 predominantly urban
• Generous rural zone surrounding Smithville
• Estimated population of proposed ward 3 above acceptable range of
variation
• Boundary lines irregular
21
Ward
One
Two
Three
Population Variance in Wards - Option A
Population
Optimal
Variance
Code
(2011)
Population
4,010
4,612
0.87
O3,811
4,612
0.83
O6,016
4,612
1.30
OR+
13,837
Summary Assessment: Option A
Guiding Principle
Meets Expectations?
Population
No
Community of Interest
Yes
Natural Boundaries
N/A
Variations in Density
Yes
Population Growth
No
Three Election
No
Effective Representation
Yes
22
ii. Option B
Map 3: Option B Proposed Wards and Population Estimates
Ü
Township of West Lincoln
Ward Boundary Review - OPTION 'B'
N.T.S.
Ward Three
Population = 5919
Ward One Population = 4483
Ward Two Population = 3435
Legend
Option B - Proposed Ward Boundaries
Smithville Urban Boundary
Road Network
May 2016: The Township of West Lincoln
The information depicted on this map has been compiled from various sources and is for illustrative purposes only.
Features:
• Two proposed rural wards unbalanced in population
• Proposed Wards 1 and 2 coherent, proposed Ward 3 predominantly urban
• Generous rural zone surrounding Smithville
• Estimated populations of two proposed wards narrowly outside acceptable
range of variation
• Old Ward 1 – Ward 2 boundary retained; proposed Ward 3 boundary lines
irregular
23
Population Variance in Wards - Option B
Population
Optimal
Variance
(2011)
Population
One
4,483
4,612
0.97
Two
3,435
4,612
0.74
Three
5,919
4,612
1.28
13,837
Ward
Code
O
OROR+
Summary Assessment: Option B
Guiding Principle
Meets Expectations?
Population
No
Community of Interest
Yes
Natural Boundaries
N/A
Variations in Density
Yes
Population Growth
No
Three Election
No
Effective Representation
Yes
24
iii. Option C
Map 4: Option C Proposed Wards and Population Estimates
Ü
Township of West Lincoln
Ward Boundary Review - OPTION 'C'
N.T.S.
Ward Three
Population = 5914
Ward One Population = 4845
Ward Two Population = 3078
Legend
Option C - Proposed Ward Boundaries
Smithville Urban Boundary
Road Network
May 2016: The Township of West Lincoln
The information depicted on this map has been compiled from various sources and is for illustrative purposes only.
Features:
• Two proposed rural wards unbalanced in area and population
• Proposed Wards 1 and 2 coherent, proposed Ward 3 predominantly urban
• Rural zone south of Smithville restricted
• Two ward populations outside acceptable range of variation
• Boundary lines generally clear
25
Population Variance in Wards - Option C
Ward Population
Optimal
Variance
Population
One
4,845
4,612
1.05
Two
3,078
4,612
0.66
Three
5,914
4,612
1.28
13,837
Code
O
OROR+
Summary Assessment: Option C
Guiding Principle
Meets Expectations?
Population
No
Community of Interest
Yes
Natural Boundaries
N/A
Variations in Density
Yes
Population Growth
No
Three Election
No
Effective Representation
No
26
iv. Option D
Map 5: Option D Proposed Wards and Population Estimates
Ü
Township of West Lincoln
Ward Boundary Review - OPTION 'D'
N.T.S.
Ward Three
Population = 5739
Ward One Population = 4599
Ward Two Population = 3499
Legend
Option C - Proposed Ward Boundaries
Smithville Urban Boundary
Road Network
May 2016: The Township of West Lincoln
The information depicted on this map has been compiled from various sources and is for illustrative purposes only.
Features:
• Two proposed rural wards unbalanced in area and population
• All wards relatively coherent (exception: proposed Ward 1 north of
Smithville)
• Modest rural zone surrounding Smithville
• Estimated ward populations within range on available 2011 data but
proposed Ward 3 probably already outside acceptable range of variation
• Boundary lines clear
27
Ward
One
Two
Three
Population Variance in Wards - Option D
Population
Optimal
Variance
(2011)
Population
4,599
4,612
0.99
3,499
4,612
0.78
5,739
4,612
1.24
13,837
Code
O
OO+
Summary Assessment: Option D
Guiding Principle
Meets Expectations?
Population
Yes
Community of Interest
Yes
Natural Boundaries
N/A
Variations in Density
Yes
Population Growth
No
Three Election
No
Effective Representation
Yes
28
8. Conclusions
This Discussion Paper has provided an overview of the 2016 Ward Boundary
Review in West Lincoln, including an explanation of the guiding principles that
are to be considered in assessing the present wards and any alternatives.
The consultantʼs assessment suggests that if the present ward design was
proposed today, it would not meet those guiding principles and it would be
difficult to defend before the Ontario Municipal Board as an equitable and
effective system of representation.
The consultant has therefore developed four Options for consideration by
residents. Each one assumes that West Lincoln will continue to have six
Councillors elected in two-member wards, although these assumptions may be
open to re-consideration if citizens express solid and reasoned arguments to
change any of them.
The primary purpose of the three consultation meetings and other feedback
methods will be to address the approaches to representation found in the four
Options. No single Option meets all of the principles completely so those
participating in the review are encouraged to start their personal evaluations at
the “high level” and to consider the representation principles implicit in these
Options before zeroing in on the actual lines on the maps.
Feedback collected in this phase of the Review will be used in the development
of the final report to go to Council in the fall of 2016.
RJW
29
Appendix A
Guiding Principles
The Ward Boundary Review Study should be conducted in consideration of the
following principles in order to provide an effective and equitable system of
representation:
• representation by population,
• protection of communities of interest and neighbourhoods,
• use of natural physical features or natural barriers as boundaries where
possible,
• variations in population density
• future population growth projections,
• development of a ward structure that will accommodate growth and population
shifts for at least three (3) Municipal Elections (2018, 2022, 2026).
Source: Clerkʼs Report RFD-C-02-2016 (January 18, 2016)
Appendix B
Dr. Robert J. Williams is an independent consultant specializing in municipal
electoral systems. Since 2008 he has undertaken reviews himself for Kitchener,
Markham, Milton, New Tecumseth, Oakville, Whitchurch-Stouffville, and Windsor.
He has also worked in conjunction with Watson and Associates on reviews for
Pelham, Barrie, Bradford West Gwillimbury, Clearview and Gravenhurst. They
are currently collaborating on ward boundary reviews in Hamilton, Milton,
Georgina and Severn.
Dr. Williams has also been an advisor to Municipal Clerks or citizens on ward
boundary matters in Wilmot, Brantford, East Gwillimbury, Kingston, Georgian
Bay, Kearney, and Killarney. He has served as an expert witness before the
OMB hearings on ten occasions. In 2010 he was engaged by the Nova Scotia
Utilities and Review Board to prepare reports in relation to the appropriate size of
councils in Halifax and Cape Breton Regional Municipalities.
Dr. Williams is a Professor Emeritus of Political Science, University of Waterloo.