Final Report
2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council
Electoral Representation Review
Wednesday 25 November 2015
This page has been left intentionally blank
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
Contents
1 Recommendation ...................................................................................................................... 4
2 Executive summary ................................................................................................................... 5
3 Background ............................................................................................................................... 7
3.1 Legislative basis ................................................................................................................. 7
3.2 The VEC’s approach .......................................................................................................... 7
3.3 The VEC’s principles .......................................................................................................... 9
3.4 The electoral representation review process ....................................................................... 9
4 Yarra Ranges Shire Council representation review ................................................................. 11
4.1 Profile of Yarra Ranges Shire Council .............................................................................. 11
4.2 Current electoral structure ................................................................................................ 12
4.3 Public information program ............................................................................................... 12
5 Preliminary report .................................................................................................................... 14
5.1 Preliminary submissions ................................................................................................... 14
5.2 Preliminary report ............................................................................................................. 15
6 Public response ...................................................................................................................... 17
6.1 Response submissions ..................................................................................................... 17
6.2 Public hearing ................................................................................................................... 18
7 Findings and recommendation ................................................................................................ 20
7.1 The VEC’s findings ........................................................................................................... 20
7.2 The VEC’s recommendation ............................................................................................. 24
Appendix 1: Public involvement ................................................................................................. 25
Appendix 2: Map ........................................................................................................................ 27
Appendix 3: Public information program ..................................................................................... 28
Page 3 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
1 Recommendation
The Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) recommends Yarra Ranges Shire Council consist of
nine councillors elected from three three-councillor wards.
This recommendation is submitted to the Minister for Local Government as required by the Local
Government Act 1989.
Please see Appendix 2 for a detailed map of this recommended structure.
Page 4 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
2 Executive summary
The Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) requires the VEC to conduct an electoral
representation review of each municipality in Victoria before every third council general election.
The purpose of an electoral representation review is to recommend an electoral structure that
provides fair and equitable representation for the persons who are entitled to vote at a general
election of the council. The matters considered by a review are:

the number of councillors

the electoral structure of the council (whether the council should be unsubdivided or
divided into wards and, if subdivided, the details of the wards).
The VEC conducts all reviews on the basis of three main principles:
1. ensuring the number of voters represented by each councillor is within 10 per cent of the
average number of voters per councillor for that municipality
2. taking a consistent, State-wide approach to the total number of councillors and
3. ensuring communities of interest are as fairly represented as possible.
Current electoral structure
2007 representation review
The last representation review for Yarra Ranges Shire Council took place in 2007. At the time of
the review, the Shire was subdivided, with nine councillors elected from single-councillor wards.
Following the review, the VEC recommended retaining this structure and making a minor
adjustment to the boundary of Ryrie Ward and O’Shannassy Ward.
2012 subdivision review
A subdivision review of Yarra Ranges Shire Council took place in 2012. As a result of the
subdivision review, minor changes were made to the boundary between Melba, Walling,
Billanook, and Chandler Wards to correct voter number imbalances that had occurred since the
2007 review.
A representation review for Yarra Ranges Shire Council was scheduled for 2019. Based on
evidence suggesting that the Lyster Ward was approaching the 10 per cent tolerance for the
average number of voters per councillor, the scheduled representation review for Yarra Ranges
Shire Council was brought forward in to the 2015 program.
Page 5 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
Preliminary submissions
Preliminary submissions opened at the commencement of the current review on Wednesday
5 August 2015. The VEC received 18 submissions by the deadline for submissions at 5.00 pm
on Wednesday 2 September.
Preliminary report
A preliminary report was released on Wednesday 30 September with the following options for
consideration:

Option A (preferred option)
Yarra Ranges Shire Council continue to consist of nine councillors elected from
single-councillor wards, with modified ward boundaries.

Option B (alternative option)
Yarra Ranges Shire Council consist of nine councillors elected from three
three-councillor wards.

Option C (alternative option)
Yarra Ranges Shire Council consist of nine councillors elected from one
four-councillor ward, one three-councillor ward, and one two-councillor ward.
Response submissions
The VEC received 18 submissions responding to the preliminary report by the deadline for
submissions at 5.00 pm on Wednesday 28 October.
Public hearing
The VEC conducted a public hearing for those wishing to speak about their response submission
at 7.00 pm on Thursday 5 November. Six people spoke at the hearing, one of whom spoke on
behalf of the Mount Evelyn Environment Protection and Progress Association (MEEPPA) and
also in an individual capacity.
Recommendation
The VEC recommends Yarra Ranges Shire Council consist of nine councillors elected
from three three-councillor wards.
This electoral structure was designated as Option B in the preliminary report. Please see
Appendix 2 for a detailed map of this recommended structure.
Page 6 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
3 Background
3.1 Legislative basis
The Act requires the VEC to conduct an electoral representation review of each municipality in
Victoria before every third general council election, or earlier if gazetted by the Minister for Local
Government.
The Act specifies that the purpose of a representation review is to recommend the number of
councillors and the electoral structure that provides ‘fair and equitable representation for the
persons who are entitled to vote at a general election of the Council.’1
The Act requires the VEC to consider:

the number of councillors in a municipality and

whether a municipality should be unsubdivided or subdivided.
If a municipality should be subdivided, the VEC must ensure that the number of voters
represented by each councillor is within 10 per cent of the average number of voters per
councillor for that municipality.2 On this basis, the review must consider the:

number of wards

ward boundaries (and ward names)

number of councillors that should be elected for each ward.
3.2 The VEC’s approach
Deciding on the number of councillors
The Act allows for a municipality to have between five and 12 councillors, but does not specify
how to decide the appropriate number.3 In considering the number of councillors for a
municipality, the VEC is guided by the Victorian Parliament’s intention for fairness and equity in
the local representation of voters under the Act.
The VEC considers that there are three major factors that should be taken into account:

diversity of the population

councillors’ workloads and

profiles of similar municipalities.
1
Section 219D of the Local Government Act 1989.
ibid.
3 Section 5B(1) of the Local Government Act 1989.
2
Page 7 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
Generally, those municipalities that have a larger number of voters will have a higher number of
councillors. Often large populations are more likely to be diverse, both in the nature and number
of their communities of interest and the issues of representation.
However, the VEC considers the particular situation of each municipality in regards to: the nature
and complexity of services provided by the Council; geographic size and topography; population
growth or decline; and the social diversity of the municipality, including social disadvantage and
cultural and age mix.
Deciding the electoral structure
The Act allows for a municipality ward structure to be:

unsubdivided—with all councillors elected ‘at large’ by all voters or

subdivided into a number of wards.
If the municipality is subdivided into wards, there are a further three options available:
1. single-councillor wards
2. multi-councillor wards or
3. a combination of single-councillor and multi-councillor wards.
A subdivided municipality must have internal ward boundaries that provide for a fair and
equitable division of the municipality, and ensure that the number of voters represented by each
councillor remains within 10 per cent of the average number of voters per councillor for the
municipality.
In considering which electoral structure is most appropriate, the VEC considers the following
matters:

communities of interest, encompassing people who share a range of common concerns,
such as geographic, economic or cultural associations

the longevity of the structure, with the aim of keeping voter numbers per councillor within
the 10 per cent tolerance as long as possible

geographic factors, such as size and topography

the number of voters in potential wards, as wards with many voters can have a large
number of candidates, which can lead to an increase in the number of informal (invalid)
votes and

clear ward boundaries.
Page 8 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
3.3 The VEC’s principles
Three main principles underlie all the VEC’s work on representation reviews:
1. Ensuring the number of voters represented by each councillor is within 10 per cent
of the average number of voters per councillor for that municipality.
Over time, population changes can lead to some wards in subdivided municipalities having larger
or smaller numbers of voters. As part of the review, the VEC corrects any imbalances and also
takes into account likely population changes to ensure ward boundaries provide equitable
representation for as long as possible.
2. Taking a consistent, State-wide approach to the total number of councillors.
The VEC is guided by its comparisons of municipalities of a similar size and category to the
council under review. The VEC also considers any special circumstances that may warrant the
municipality having more or fewer councillors than similar municipalities.
3. Ensuring communities of interest are as fairly represented as possible.
Each municipality contains a number of communities of interest. Where practicable, the electoral
structure should be designed to ensure they are fairly represented, and that geographic
communities of interest are not split by ward boundaries. This allows elected councillors to be
more effective representatives of the people and interests in their particular municipality or ward.
3.4 The electoral representation review process
Developing recommendations
The VEC bases its recommendations for particular electoral structures on the following
information:

internal research specifically relating to the municipality under review, including Australian
Bureau of Statistics and .id (Informed Decisions) Pty Ltd4 data; voter statistics from the
Victorian electoral roll; and other State and local government data sets

small area forecasts provided by .id (Informed Decisions) Pty Ltd

the VEC’s experience conducting previous electoral representation reviews of local
councils and similar reviews for State elections

the VEC’s expertise in mapping, demography and local government
4
.id is a company specialising in population and demographic analysis that builds suburb-level
demographic information products in most jurisdictions in Australia and New Zealand.
Page 9 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review

careful consideration of all input from the public in written and verbal submissions
received during the review and

advice from consultants with extensive experience in local government.
Public involvement
Public input is accepted by the VEC:

in preliminary submissions at the start of the review

in response submissions to the preliminary report and

in a public hearing that provides an opportunity for people who have made a response
submission to expand on this submission.
Public submissions are an important part of the process, but are not the only consideration
during a review. The VEC ensures its recommendations are in compliance with the Act and are
formed through careful consideration of public submissions, independent research, and analysis
of all relevant factors, such as the need to give representation to communities of interest.
Page 10 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
4 Yarra Ranges Shire Council representation
review
4.1 Profile of Yarra Ranges Shire Council
Yarra Ranges Shire is located on the fringe of metropolitan Melbourne. Geographically, it is one
of the larger metropolitan councils, covering an area of 2,466 square kilometres. The Shire is
bordered by Nillumbik and Murrindindi Shires to the north, with the outer-urban municipalities of
Manningham, Maroondah and Knox to the west, and the municipalities of Casey, Cardinia, Baw
Baw and Mansfield to the south, east and north-east. The population of Yarra Ranges Shire is
concentrated in the western outer-urban part of the municipality, with smaller populations
dispersed throughout the centre of the Shire around the foothills of the Yarra Ranges to the east,
comprising mostly rural land and native forest.
Yarra Ranges Shire has a population of just over 150,000 residents,5 and is expected to
experience a slow rate of growth (under 1 per cent per year) through to 2031.6 The number of
1F
voters in the Shire is currently estimated at 113,596, with 12,622 voters7 per councillor.
As a municipality that is close to Melbourne’s outer-eastern urban fringe, and rural and regional
shires to the east, Yarra Ranges has a mixed social profile that reflects both urban and
non-urban characteristics. While the municipality has a similar number of older residents to that
of rural and regional Victoria, this population is slightly higher when compared to Greater
Melbourne.8
The Shire has a median age of 38, which is slightly lower than other rural and regional
municipalities in Victoria as a whole.9 By contrast, the municipality has a higher number of
residents born overseas and a slightly higher population of people aged between 18 and 49,
when compared to rural and regional Victoria. The Shire also has a relatively high workforce
participation rate and comparatively low unemployment. Yarra Ranges Shire has a slightly lower
mobility rate than rural and regional Victoria, with up to 32 per cent of residents moving in the five
years between 2006 and 2011.
The Shire has a number of distinct natural environments in the Dandenong Ranges, Kinglake
and Yarra Ranges National Parks, and local reservoirs which contribute to Melbourne’s water
supplies. As well as protected natural environments, land use includes agricultural and
wine-producing areas. Construction is one of the biggest local economic drivers (employing
5
Australian Bureau of Statistics, Estimated Resident Population, 2014.
Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure, Victoria in Future 2014.
7 Data derived by Victorian Electoral Commission from State and Council voter rolls (as at June 2015).
8 Profile i.d., Yarra Ranges Community Profile.
9 All population data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) 2011 Census unless indicated.
6
Page 11 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
13.3 per cent of the workforce) with manufacturing (12.7 per cent) and retail trade (11.3 per cent)
also significant employers.
4.2 Current electoral structure
2007 representation review
The last representation review for Yarra Ranges Shire Council took place in 2007. At the time of
the review, the Shire was subdivided, with nine councillors elected from single-councillor wards.
Following the review, the VEC recommended retaining this structure and making a minor
adjustment to the boundary of Ryrie Ward and O’Shannassy Ward.
2012 subdivision review
A subdivision review of Yarra Ranges Shire Council took place in 2012. As a result of the
subdivision review, minor changes were made to the boundary between Melba and Walling
Wards, and the boundary between Billanook and Chandler Wards, to correct voter number
imbalances that had occurred since the 2007 review.
A representation review for Yarra Ranges Shire Council was scheduled for 2019. Based on
evidence suggesting that the Lyster Ward was approaching the 10 per cent tolerance for the
average number of voters per councillor, the scheduled representation review for Yarra Ranges
Shire Council was brought forward in to the 2015 program.
4.3 Public information program
Public involvement is an important part of the representation review process. The Yarra Ranges
Shire Council representation review commenced on Wednesday 5 August and the VEC
conducted a public information program to inform the community, including:

public notices of the review and the release of the preliminary report in local and
state-wide papers

media releases announcing the commencement of the review, the release of the
preliminary report and the publication of this final report

public information sessions to outline the review process and respond to questions from
the community

coverage through the municipality’s media, e.g. Council website or newsletter

a helpline and dedicated email address to answer public enquiries

ongoing information updates and publication of submissions on the VEC website and
Page 12 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review

a Guide for Submissions to explain the review process and provide background
information on the scope of the review.
See Appendix 3 for full details of the public information program.
Page 13 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
5 Preliminary report
5.1 Preliminary submissions
The VEC received 18 preliminary submissions by the deadline for submissions at 5.00 pm on
Wednesday 2 September. A list of people who made a preliminary submission can be found in
Appendix 1.
Number of councillors
Almost three quarters of submissions supported retaining the current number of nine councillors.
Five of the 18 submissions supported increasing the number of councillors, with three
submissions supporting an increase to 11 councillors; one supporting an increase to 10
councillors; and one submission supporting either the status quo or increasing the number of
councillors to 12.
In its submission, Yarra Ranges Shire Council stated that the current number of councillors is
appropriate when benchmarked against other councils in the metropolitan/rural fringe category.
The Council’s submission noted that population growth is expected to be slow, and that nine
wards is a good fit for representation of the whole Shire in terms of contact points and advocacy
for community members. These sentiments were echoed in a separate submission by Councillor
Mike Clarke.
Submissions in support of increasing the number of councillors stated that the size of the Shire
warranted the increase, and that the current voter numbers and projected population growth
were also factors to be taken into account when considering councillor numbers.
Electoral structure
A range of options were put forward by submitters regarding the electoral structure for Yarra
Ranges Shire Council. The most commonly preferred model (put forward by eight of 18
submitters) was a three-ward model of three councillors per ward. Five submissions (including
the Yarra Ranges Shire Council and three councillors submitting individually) supported the
existing structure of nine councillors in single-councillor wards, while two submissions supported
a single-councillor ward structure with 11 councillors. One submission supported a model of 11
councillors with a mix of single- and multi-councillor wards; one submission favoured a
single-councillor model with 10 wards; and one submission preferred a subdivided model with
three possible wards, and did not comment on the number of councillors.
Page 14 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
5.2 Preliminary report
A preliminary report was released on Wednesday 30 September. The VEC considered public
submissions and research findings when formulating the options presented in the preliminary
report.
Number of councillors
The three models put forward by the VEC for further consultation all retained the current number
of nine councillors. The factors considered by the VEC in determining councillor numbers
included the projected population growth, geographic size, and social profile of the municipality,
including any distinct communities of interest that may warrant specific council representation.
In 2015, the population growth rate for the Yarra Ranges Shire Council was revised up to 0.7 per
cent per annum from 0.6 per cent in 201410. In terms of the benchmark comparisons with other
municipalities in the metropolitan/rural fringe category, Yarra Ranges Shire Council has the
greatest number of voters for a municipality with nine councillors. While the VEC considered
increasing the number of councillors to 11 on the basis of state-wide consistency, it noted that
those comparable metropolitan/rural fringe councils with more than nine councillors had
significantly higher numbers of voters and rapid population growth (such as the Cities of Hume,
Whittlesea and Wyndham).
The VEC also considered the geographic size of Yarra Ranges Shire and the long distances
some councillors are required to travel, particularly at the eastern rural end of the Shire. While
the VEC recognises this challenge for councillors in the Ryrie and O’Shannassy Wards in
particular, it was noted that an increase in councillor numbers could reduce travel requirements,
but because of the distribution of the population within the Shire, the impact on the larger rural
wards would not be significantly different.
The VEC also recognises that the social, environmental and cultural profile of the Shire is
diverse. The Shire has a higher proportion of people born overseas compared to rural and
regional Victoria, and a slightly higher proportion of people who speak a language other than
English at home.11 While there is a culturally diverse community, it is not as diverse as in other
municipalities, and there are no distinguishing or changing characteristics which could be seen to
impose an additional workload on councillors. For these reasons, the VEC is satisfied that nine
councillors remains an appropriate number for the Shire.
10
11
Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure, Victoria in Future 2014, 2015.
Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census data, 2011.
Page 15 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
Electoral structure
The VEC put forward three models for further consultation. Option A reflected the status quo of
nine councillors elected from single-councillor wards, with slightly modified ward boundaries.
Option B reflected the strong message in submissions that a three-ward model with three
councillors in each would be the best way to represent the three major geographic communities
of the municipality. Option C (a multi-councillor model with one four-councillor ward, one threecouncillor ward and one two-councillor ward) also reflected the desire for multi-councillor wards
expressed in submissions, minimising the need to split localities and providing an alternative
arrangement for capturing identified communities.
Options
After careful consideration, the VEC put forward the following options:

Option A (preferred option)
Yarra Ranges Shire Council continue to consist of nine councillors elected from
single-councillor wards, with modified ward boundaries.

Option B (alternative option)
Yarra Ranges Shire Council consist of nine councillors elected from three
three-councillor wards.

Option C (alternative option)
Yarra Ranges Shire Council consist of nine councillors elected from one
four-councillor ward, one three-councillor ward, and one two-councillor ward.
Page 16 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
6 Public response
6.1 Response submissions
The VEC accepted submissions responding to the preliminary report from Wednesday
30 September until 5.00 pm on Wednesday 28 October. The VEC received 18 response
submissions. A list of people who made a response submission can be found in Appendix 1.
Table 1 indicates the level of support for each option.
Table 1: Preferences expressed in response submissions*
Option A
Option B
Option C
7
10
0
*One submission did not support any of the VEC’s proposed options.
Submissions in support of Option A
There were seven response submissions in support of Option A, received from a range of
submitters including individuals, a community organisation, three councillors, and the Yarra
Ranges Shire Council. In general, these submissions reiterated support for single-councillor
wards on the basis that they provided strong local representation, as councillors had an
opportunity to get to know their wards well.
Many of the submissions supporting Option A were from councillors and also included the Yarra
Ranges Shire Council. This group of submissions conveyed a sense that the current system was
working well, and there was no reason to change. The Council’s submission stated that the
current structure of nine councillors in single-councillor wards was effective on the grounds that it
provided a responsible balance of local representation and representation of diverse views. The
Council also suggested that the model offered streamlined decision-making. However, although
supporting the single-councillor ward structure, the Council’s submission also proposed
significant adjustments to the boundaries used in Option A. The VEC’s consideration of the
Council’s proposal is outlined in the VEC’s findings in section 7 of this report.
Deputy Mayor, Councillor Jason Callanan, submitted that single-councillor wards have worked
well for the municipality, and also proposed a number of boundary changes in Monbulk around
the Monbulk Aquatic Centre. Cr Callanan was opposed to multi-councillor wards on the basis
that they could lead to voters ‘playing’ councillors off against each other. Councillor Jim Child
stated that the current structure provided fair and equitable representation for the 55
communities of the Yarra Ranges. Cr Child was concerned that multi-councillor wards combining
the current Ryrie and O’Shannassy Wards would group together towns which had few common
Page 17 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
interests, such as Healesville and Warburton. Yarra Ranges Shire Mayor, Councillor Maria
McCarthy, supported Option A, but stated a preference for the urban components to be
encapsulated within a single ward.
The submissions from individuals and the Mount Evelyn Environment Protection and Progress
Association (MEEPPA) supported Option A, although one individual preferred 11 councillors.
MEEPPA’s support for Option A was also qualified, raising concerns that the proposed boundary
adjustments would result in a further fragmentation of the Mount Evelyn locality, particularly at
the southern end of Olinda Creek and in the northern part of the locality at Queen Road. The
organisation was concerned that their efforts to preserve local heritage and attract funding for
environmental conservation would be compromised without a single-councillor ward structure
that did not divide the Mount Evelyn locality.
Submissions in support of Option B
Ten submissions were received in support of Option B, made by individual submitters, the
Healesville Action Group and the Proportional Representation Society (PRSA). Individual
submissions came from residents living throughout the Shire, ranging in locations from
Healesville, Selby and Belgrave South to Olinda and Upwey. Many of these individual submitters
stated that the multi-councillor wards of Option B would allow for a range of views to be
represented, and also provide a choice of councillors for ratepayers to approach with issues of
concern.
The Healesville Action Group supported Option B on the basis that it best reflected communities
of interest. The Group opposed Option A, stating that it was less able to produce an over-arching
view of the Shire, and that smaller wards could foster parochial interests. The Group also
opposed Option C, suggesting the option was limited by the differing number of councillors in
each of the proposed wards.
The Proportional Representation Society of Australia (PRSA) supported Option B, suggesting
that it would reflect an absolute majority of voters electing an absolute majority of councillors;
reduce the likelihood of uncontested elections; and result in an equal number of councillors per
ward and therefore an equivalent quota in each ward. The PRSA also stated that the proposed
boundaries of Option B were easily identifiable.
6.2 Public hearing
The VEC conducted a public hearing for those wishing to speak about their response submission
at 7.00 pm on Thursday 5 November at the Yarra Ranges Shire Council Offices, 15 Anderson
Street, Lilydale. A list of people who spoke at the hearing can be found in Appendix 1.
Page 18 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
Division of localities
The issue of whether localities would be divided under the proposed options was critical for some
speakers, particularly with reference to the townships of Monbulk, Montrose and Mount Evelyn,
and the location of Silvan under Option B. Speakers from Mount Evelyn, including the speaker
on behalf of the Mount Evelyn Environment Protection and Progress Association, were
concerned that Option A would further dissect their locality. However, although Option B would
be a preferable model on the grounds of preserving localities and reflecting communities of
interest, these speakers were not prepared to support Option B on the basis that, in their view,
the geographic area was too large and because, in their view, multi-councillor wards would not
provide direct accountability compared to single-councillor wards. Councillors who spoke at the
public hearing in support of Option A noted that this issue of preserving localities was a concern
to many submitters. When asked how the boundaries could be maintained without fracturing
localities, a councillor suggested that localities are already divided to an extent under the current
structure, but there is consistency in representation as councillors are obliged to represent all
areas within their wards.
Geographic size
There was broad agreement among speakers at the public hearing that Option B was preferable
to Option C, on the basis that the geographically large O’Shannassy Ward had only two
councillors under Option C as opposed to three councillors under Option B. One councillor (in
support of Option A) suggested that after multiple elected councillors divided responsibilities for
the wards under Options B and C, there would be no real difference compared to the current
model of single-councillor wards.
Single-councillor wards compared to multi-councillor wards
Advocates of multi-councillor wards argued that voters would benefit from having multiple
councillors to approach, particularly if one was absent.
By contrast, councillors who spoke at the hearing argued that under the current single-councillor
model, any constituent can approach them about any issue. Speakers on behalf of the Yarra
Ranges Shire Council (a Councillor and a Council officer making a joint submission) suggested
multi-councillor wards would unnecessarily complicate decision-making.
One speaker put forward arguments against Option C, on the grounds that there were a different
number of councillors for each ward.
Page 19 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
7 Findings and recommendation
7.1 The VEC’s findings
Number of councillors
Determining the appropriate number of councillors for Yarra Ranges Shire Council centred on
the consideration of projected population growth, geographic size, and social profile of the
municipality, including any distinct communities of interest that may warrant specific council
representation.
The VEC concluded that the Yarra Ranges Shire Council did not require a change to the number
of councillors based on its current population or projected rate of growth. Similarly, the VEC
recognised that the geographic size of Yarra Ranges Shire required some councillors to travel
reasonable distances (particularly in the rural wards), but concluded that changing the number of
councillors would not make significant impacts to the travel distances.
While the VEC recognised that the social, cultural and environmental profile of the Shire is
diverse, it concluded that there were no distinguishing characteristics or new responsibilities for
Council’s attention which could be seen to impose an additional workload on councillors. For
these reasons, the VEC is satisfied that nine councillors remains an appropriate number for the
Shire.
Electoral structure
The VEC put forward three models for consultation. Option A reflected the status quo of nine
councillors elected from single-councillor wards, with slightly modified ward boundaries. Option B
reflected the strong message in preliminary submissions that a three ward model of three
councillors in each ward would be the best way to represent the three major geographic
communities of the municipality. Option C, a multi-councillor model with one four-councillor ward,
one three-councillor ward and one two-councillor ward, also reflected submissions preferring
multiple councillors as well as providing strong and easily identifiable boundaries that assist in
minimising splitting localities between separate wards. The VEC’s findings in relation to the
electoral structure and reasons for its decision to recommend Option B are outlined below.
Methodology
If a municipality is to be subdivided into wards, the VEC has a legal obligation to ensure that the
number of voters represented by each councillor is within 10 per cent of the average number of
voters per councillor for the whole municipality. To meet this obligation in the proposed electoral
models in the Yarra Ranges Shire, the VEC used data derived from State and Council voter rolls
Page 20 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
(as at June 2015) and projected estimates to calculate the current and forecast number of voters
in the municipality.
The VEC noted that several submitters (including the Yarra Ranges Shire Council and some
individual councillors) put forward alternative boundaries to those modelled by the VEC. These
proposals used population data and not total number of voters to calculate the average number
of people within a proposed ward. This methodology produced results which did not comply with
the VEC’s legal obligations in relation to the 10 per cent tolerance for voter-to-councillor ratio,
and on this basis the proposed models were not suitable for further consideration.
Option A: Nine councillors elected from single-councillor wards
The VEC put forward a preferred option reflecting the existing structure of nine councillors
elected from single-councillor wards, based on the support expressed in preliminary submissions
for retaining the current number of councillors; evidence in submissions that the current model is
providing fair and equitable representation; and the VEC’s preference for minimal change if there
are no special circumstances to warrant major changes. The model reflected the strong
sentiment in a number of submissions that Yarra Ranges Shire was characterised by many
communities of interest, ranging from the urban areas of Lilydale, Chirnside Park, Kilsyth and
Mooroolbark to the communities around the Dandenong Ranges and rural areas in the east.
However, placing boundaries around nine single-councillor wards necessarily involves division of
localities to meet the legislative enrolment requirement for each ward. This is the case under the
existing structure, particularly at the densely populated western end of the municipality. Under
Option A, the VEC slightly adjusted existing ward boundaries in order to bring the voter numbers
into better alignment and minimise the need for the pattern of recurring boundary reviews that
Yarra Ranges Shire Council has experienced over the last few election cycles.
The VEC noted that the Yarra Ranges Shire Council’s response submission in favour of nine
single-councillor wards contained substantially altered boundaries compared to the existing
structure. Under the Council’s proposal, the boundaries of the Billanook, Chirnside, Streeton,
Melba and Walling Wards are modified significantly, particularly impacting the localities of
Wandin North, Mount Evelyn, and Lilydale. In the VEC’s view, this demonstrates the vulnerability
of the single-ward structure for the Yarra Ranges Shire, and the increasingly challenging task of
designing boundaries which are sustainable considering the uneven population growth.
The average annual population growth rate for the Yarra Ranges Shire Council is not particularly
high, ranging from 0.6 to 0.7 per cent in the past two years, but it is expected to occur at the
Page 21 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
interface of the Melbourne urban growth zone12 at the western end of the municipality, within the
current wards of Chirnside, Billanook, Melba and Walling.
Based on these limitations, the VEC concludes that Option A is not the most suitable electoral
structure for Yarra Ranges Shire Council.
Option B: nine councillors elected from three three-councillor wards
The model put forward by the VEC in Option B captured the sentiment expressed in many of the
submissions, which described the natural formation of three distinct areas: the densely populated
urban area of the metropolitan fringe; the south-western area around the Dandenong Ranges;
and the rural communities and natural environments in the east of the municipality. Option B has
strong and clearly identifiable ward boundaries reflecting these communities of interest. This
option combines the current wards of O’Shannassy, Ryrie and part of Chandler into a large rural
ward. Parts of the inner Dandenong Ranges in Streeton and Lyster Wards are combined; with
sections of the Walling, Melba and Billanook Wards also merged to form one larger, urban multicouncillor ward. The boundaries avoid splitting localities as far as possible, and of all the options,
the preservation of localities (particularly in the higher-density urban western part of the Shire) is
achieved most effectively by this model.
This model also brings with it the benefits of the proportional representation vote counting
method, and provides voters with a greater number of candidates to choose from at election
time. Once in office, there are more councillors for constituents to approach on matters of
concern in each ward. One of the limitations of multi-councillor wards is that the capacity for
councillors to be familiar with all local issues can be reduced due to the larger size of the wards.
With three councillors per ward, however, there is an opportunity for sharing the workload
between councillors. While the O’Shannassy Ward proposed under Option B is much larger in
geographic area than the current single-councillor ward, the model increases the representation
for voters in the ward by providing more councillors. Fair and equitable representation is still able
to be achieved, and is arguably improved, with multiple councillors per ward. The three-ward
structure with three councillors per ward is considered by the VEC to be less vulnerable to the
impacts of the population growth pattern, and is therefore a sustainable model for the
municipality into the future.
In submissions and at the public hearing, the VEC heard persuasive arguments for the three
three-councillor wards option, put forward by residents from across the whole municipality. The
model has been tested in previous reviews and has consistently received strong local support.
While it is important to note that the VEC’s decision is not made according to the popularity of the
12
Metropolitan Planning Authority, 2015, mpa.vic.gov.au/urban-growth-zone/
Page 22 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
option, it is clear that there is an appetite for change, with momentum building over a number of
years.
Taking into account the effects of the uneven projected population pattern, longer-term
vulnerability of the single-ward boundaries, as well as the sentiment expressed in submissions in
support of Option B, the VEC considers Option B a preferable model for the Shire.
Option C: nine councillors elected from one four-councillor ward, one three-councillor
ward, and one two-councillor ward
Option C also responded to the distinct communities of interest described by submitters with
wards for the urban area in the west; the Dandenong Ranges and semi-rural area in the
centre/west; and the large rural, regional and agricultural areas to the east. The boundaries are
slightly different to those of Option B. The very large O’Shannassy Ward of Option B is reduced
by placing the localities of Mount Evelyn, Silvan, Seville, Wandin North and Wandin East into
Chandler Ward, with four councillors. While O’Shannassy Ward in Option C is smaller than that
of Option B, it is not significantly smaller, and has two councillors compared to three under
Option B, therefore requiring councillors to represent a larger geographic area.
In putting it forward, the VEC noted that the differing numbers of councillors per ward under this
option may give rise to perceptions of inequality of representation for voters throughout the Shire,
making it less preferable to Option B. The option was effectively ruled out on the basis of these
limitations, and on the grounds that in comparison to the competing viable Options A and B, it
was not supported to any degree in submissions.
Summary of findings
The representation review for the Yarra Ranges Shire Council was complex, with challenging
considerations for the VEC to take into account including the impact of uneven population
growth, the competing strengths of the three proposed models, as well as the detailed viewpoints
of the many stakeholders contributing to the review.
Following thorough consideration, the VEC has concluded that Option B is the model best suited
for Yarra Ranges Shire Council. The VEC considers nine councillors to be the appropriate
number of councillors for the Shire on the basis of the projected population growth; geographic
size; and social, cultural and environmental heritage. In terms of electoral structure, the model
offers fair and equitable representation in multi-councillor wards which preserve localities to the
best extent possible, and provides choice of candidates and councillors for voters. Importantly,
the model is less vulnerable to the uneven pattern of population growth occurring in the Shire.
Page 23 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
7.2 The VEC’s recommendation
The VEC recommends Yarra Ranges Shire Council consist of nine councillors elected
from three three-councillor wards.
This electoral structure was designated as Option B in the preliminary report. Please see
Appendix 2 for a detailed map of this recommended structure.
Page 24 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
Appendix 1: Public involvement
Preliminary submissions
Preliminary submissions were received from:
Cr Jason Callanan
Cr Jim Child
Cr Mike Clarke
Samantha Dunn
Carolyn Ebdon
Albia Fulvia-Inserra
Kate Gutske
Linda Hamilton
Gary McCarten
Dianne Moore
David Rose
Francis Smith
Ross Whitford
Roger Willsher
Healesville Action Group
Mount Evelyn Environment Protection and Progress Association
Proportional Representation Society of Australia (Victoria-Tasmania) Inc
Yarra Ranges Shire Council
Response submissions
Response submissions were received from:
Margaret Blair
Cr Jason Callanan
Cr Jim Child
(cont’d)
Page 25 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
Samantha Dunn
Sally Everitt
Catherine Keil
Ad Ligthart
Gary McCarten
Cr Maria McCarthy, Mayor
Marcus Ogden
Donna Runner
Francis Smith
Robert Stephen
Ross Whitford
Healesville Action Group
Mount Evelyn Environment Protection and Progress Association
Proportional Representation Society (Victoria-Tasmania) Inc
Yarra Ranges Shire Council
Public hearing
The following individuals spoke at the public hearing:
John Anwin, Healesville Action Group
Jennifer Bednar and Cr Len Cox, Yarra Ranges Shire Council (joint submission)
Cr Jim Child
Cr Mike Clarke
Francis Smith
Francis Smith, on behalf of Mount Evelyn Environment Protection and Progress
Association
Ross Whitford
Page 26 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
Appendix 2: Map
Page 27 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
Appendix 3: Public information program
Advertising
In accordance with the Act, public notices of the review and the release of the preliminary report
were placed in the following newspapers:
Newspaper
Notice of review
Notice of preliminary report
Herald Sun
Wednesday 15 July
Wednesday 9 September
Free Press Leader
Tuesday 4 August
Wednesday 30 September
Mount Evelyn Mail
Tuesday 4 August
Tuesday 6 October
Ranges Trader Mail
Tuesday 4 August
Tuesday 6 October
Mountain Views Mail
Tuesday 4 August
Tuesday 6 October
Ferntree Gully Belgrave Mail
Tuesday 4 August
Tuesday 6 October
Lilydale Yarra Valley Leader
Tuesday 4 August
Tuesday 6 October
The Age
Tuesday 4 August
Wednesday 30 September
Media releases
A media release was prepared and distributed to local media at the commencement of the
review on Wednesday 5 August. A further release was distributed at the publication of the
preliminary report on Wednesday 30 September. A final release was circulated on the publication
date of this final report.
Public information sessions
Public information sessions for people interested in the review process were held on:

Monday 10 August at the Yarra Ranges Shire Council Offices, 15 Anderson Street,
Lilydale

Wednesday 12 August at The Memo, 235 Maroondah Highway, Healesville

Thursday 13 August at the Monbulk Community Link, 21 Main Road, Monbulk.
Helpline and email address
A telephone helpline and dedicated email address were established to assist members of the
public with enquiries about the review process.
VEC website
The VEC website delivered up-to-date information to provide transparency and facilitate public
participation during the review process. An online submission tool was made available and all
public submissions were posted on the website.
Page 28 of 32
Final Report: 2015 Yarra Ranges Shire Council Electoral Representation Review
Guide for Submissions
A Guide for Submissions was developed and distributed to those interested in making
submissions. Copies of the Guide were available on the VEC website, in hardcopy on request
and also provided to Council.
Council website and newsletter
Information about the review was provided to Council for publication in council media,
e.g. website and newsletter.
Page 29 of 32
This page has been left intentionally blank
This page has been left intentionally blank
Victorian Electoral Commission
Level 11, 530 Collins Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
131 832
yarraranges.review@vec.vic.gov.au