Canadian Redistribution - Provincial and Municipal

[Hatman 🍁]

Conestoga-Preston-Hespeler and Galt-Brant?

This works. Cambridge needs to be split up anyways, as it's too big to be one riding. Might as well split it down the middle, Barrie-style.

[Hatman 🍁]

I'm all for anachronistic riding names.

[Hatman 🍁]

And having a riding named after John Galt would make the Libertarians happy.

Anyway, I've updated my map with changes in Wellington, Halton and Peel.  But Conestoga-Brant stays put.

https://goo.gl/6UMkjz

At least the Brampton-Caledon riding makes more sense.

[Hatman 🍁]

Much better. It's a very natural split for Cambridge.

[Hatman 🍁]

DC is right, the Truro-Cole Harbour riding is awkward. Why not extend the Cape Breton riding west to New Glasgow, add Musquodoboit Valley to the Cumberland-Colechester riding and have a Cole Harbour/Eastern Shore based riding?

[Hatman 🍁]

(1) Sackville/Halifax is now balanced.

(2) Red Deer is now reunified.

(3) Edmonton-Mill Woods is now 20% more Mill Woods-y.


Enjoy your Labour Day weekend.



Any opinions on Wild Rose vs. Rocky Mountain?

Wild Rose makes more sense. The short-lived Rocky Mountain riding covered much more of the Rockies. Now, I'm no fan of the name "Wild Rose" as it's meaningless; so we could explore different options. A more descriptive name would be "Banff-Cochrane-Clearwater" or "Banff-Cochrane-Rocky Mountain House".

[Hatman 🍁]

Going back to Ontario; I think one recommendation I would make is moving all of the rural parts of Nepean and adding it to Carleton. This both balances population and COI better.

[Hatman 🍁]

DC is right, the Truro-Cole Harbour riding is awkward.

This makes me wonder how the committee will actually address this after the 2021 census. Southern mainland NS will be fine as is, but Cape Breton/northern mainland already didn't have the population to justify their seats in 2016 census and Halifax will probably be entitled to something like 4.75 or 4.8 seats. They'll probably have to make another Halifax based seat with a bit of rural NS tacked on (as opposed to making four Halifax seats and tacking the remainder onto various rural ridings like they did the last two times.) It's probably going to look awkward as hell.

DC is right, the Truro-Cole Harbour riding is awkward. Why not extend the Cape Breton riding west to New Glasgow, add Musquodoboit Valley to the Cumberland-Colechester riding and have a Cole Harbour/Eastern Shore based riding?

How would you split Pictou County? All those little towns near New Glasgow all blend together to form one small metro area... and that's the bulk of the county's population. Splitting them wouldn't go over well.

Here are the seat entitlements for each Nova Scotia county.  If an area has 87,200 people (2021 Projection), then it would be 'entitled' to have one Member of Parliament.

1.10 - Cape Breton
0.08 - Victoria
0.19 - Inverness
0.10 - Richmond
0.08 - Guysborough
0.22 - Antigonish
0.50 - Pictou
0.34 - Cumberland
0.59 - Colchester
5.09 - Halifax
0.49 - Hants
0.70 - Kings
0.24 - Annapolis
0.19 - Digby
0.27 - Yarmouth
0.15 - Shelburne
0.12 - Queens
0.54 - Lunenburg


And here's the breakdown by current FED.  Since none of the eleven Nova Scotia ridings are outside the 25% threshold, you could get away with the status quo.

0.81 - Sydney--Victoria
0.80 - Cape Breton--Canso
0.84 - Central Nova
0.92 - Cumberland--Colchester
1.16 - Dartmouth--Cole Harbour
1.09 - Sackville--Preston--Chezzetcook
1.22 - Halifax West
1.20 - Halifax
0.96 - Kings--Hants
0.93 - West Nova
1.07 - South Shore--St. Margarets

What if we ignored Cape Breton, rejigged Halifax (add more of the Eastern Shore/Chezzatcook to Central Nova, move some of Darmouth to Sackville, add some Halifax suburbs to the South Shore) and moved Shelburne County to West Nova? Is there a big COI difference between West Nova and the South Shore (fancophones?). Parts of Shelburne were lumped with Yarmouth prior to the 1970s, but that boundary has held firm ever since.

[Hatman 🍁]

Since we're turning this into a redistricting thread:

I just came back from a trip to Vancouver, so I thought I'd take a stab at a 10 ward map of the city. (currently they have an antiquated plurality-at-large voting system)



All wards are within 10% of the average. Unfortunately, my computer crashed and I lost the spreadsheet. In hindsight, I would've changed the boundary between Kensington and Langara a bit.

[Hatman 🍁]

I don't hate the changes, but why are you so averse to triple barrelled names? Some of these ridings would need them to keep everyone happy.

[Hatman 🍁]

Edmonton-Elk Island is very messy. If you're going to have a riding go across Edmonton city limits, it should have St. Albert or Sherwood Park in it, I think.

[Hatman 🍁]

Parkland-Redwater is now the weird riding

[Hatman 🍁]

Ugh. What a mess. At least they're adding seats, which is refreshing considering what's going on here.

What's the justification of having the Guysborough seat under the 25% allowance? All they gotta do is move the western boundary a bit.

[Hatman 🍁]

Cheticamp kind of reminds me of the new Mushkegowuk-James Bay. Sure, it's a 'rotten borough', but tiny minority ridings seem to be all the rage right now. And having 2 super safe NDP First Nations rotten boroughs in Ontario still didn't negate the PC structural advantage in the rest of the province.

[Hatman 🍁]

From a local's POV I can see a lot of community of interest issues, but I don't know a lot about map making per se. Also I can kind of buy having somewhat smaller seats to represent minorities, but Cheticamp is a rotten borough straight out of the 18th century... If they had made a Cheticamp seat last time, my riding would be nearly nine times the population right now!

 
5. to obtain public input on the creation of a Members-at-Large group to provide for effective representation and voter parity

Is this code for proportional representation?

[Hatman 🍁]

I've finally updated my map with 78 alternative federal ridings in Quebec.

https://goo.gl/6UMkjz

Here are the highlights:
- Four ridings in Gaspésie and Bas-Saint-Laurent get squeezed into three
- A new seat pops up in Mascouche
- 72 out of the 78 seats are within 10% of the provincial average, with one just over (+10.2%)
- Five northern/Saguenay seats between -10% and -20%
- 34 ridings remain unchanged
- Newly renamed Sheffield-Acton would be the most triangular electoral district in Canada, though Montmorency-Charlevoix would be close

Your adoption of some of the modern RCM names is disappointing, but I like how you've reverted back to the Montmorency-Charlevoix name.

For BC, is there anyway to rejig the Lower Mainland ridings so there is no crossover of the Burrard Inlet? You would have to move things around in the Interior a bit (like removing Whistler/Squamish from the West Van riding)

[Hatman 🍁]

Elizabeth May would not be happy.

[Hatman 🍁]

Now here's another question: Is it possible to avoid crossing both the Burrard Inlet AND the Georgia Strait?

[Hatman 🍁]

What if you made a riding that went from the Cariboo to Powell River, and then down to the northern Lower Mainland? (Coast--Cariboo?)

[Hatman 🍁]

I was hoping you'd take in more of the Whistler/Squamish area rather than go that far into Cariboo.

[Hatman 🍁]

Hmm....

How about this:

- Vancouver Island - 7 districts
- Extend Skeena-Bulkley Valley down the coast up to Powell River
- North Shore+Sunshine Coast (+Powell River?) - 2 districts
- Squamish-Lillooet+Cariboo = 1 district

[Hatman 🍁]

Side note, but I really wish there was a Canadian version of DRA.

Been kinda working off and on on one for a while now.....it's just a matter of what to use for building blocks. StatsCan's block boundaries often make no geographical sense.

To be fair, neither do precincts in the US.

[Hatman 🍁]

I of course have been working on my own map.


A few notes (originally sent in a PM to Krago):

- You have to first work under the assumption that the rural wards will not be reduced in anyway. I know you did to keep the number of wards at 23 and add a new one in the south end, which will be inevitable. This why (much to the mayor's chagrin), I am confident that they will be forced to add a ward. Hopefully Doug Ford won't notice!

- In the east (Orleans), your plan is almost identical to what I would do. I would suggest "Gloucester North" or "Green's Creek" as the name of the Beacon Hill-Blackburn ward.
- I haven't taken a good look at the west end yet, but I doubt they will make Stittsville any bigger, as it's a growing community. Remember, when it was created in the last redistribution, it was even smaller in population.
- In the south end, I would add Bells Corners to Barrhaven to make the area worth 3 seats. Geographically, it makes less sense than your plan though, but historically Bells Corners and Barrhaven have been in the same ward before. Plus, it reduces the population of the over-populated College Ward, and reduces the domino affects in the rest of the city.
- I would rename Bell-Centrepointe to Bell-Greenbank. And I'm not sure if College is the best name for that ward anymore, as it's geographically very different from current College Ward. Merivale would be a very good name for that ward, actually (or Merivale North, and rename the other Merivale Ward as Merivale South?)
- I like what you've done with Capital Ward. With my plan (which adds a new seat), Rideau-Vanier becomes too big (I'm also using the city's 2018 population estimates, which has the population of the ward at 50k, much larger than the census numbers), so I have moved the northern border of Capital Ward up to Laurier. I hate splitting up Sandy Hill, but the only other option is splitting Vanier, which would probably upset more people.

[Hatman 🍁]

Anyway, I think I will use this thread to gather my thoughts on the subject. I think, as someone who has studied Ottawa's ward maps over the course of the city's history, I am uniquely qualified to discuss this matter. Fun fact, after Ottawa annexed parts of Gloucester and Nepean in 1950, we had 33 city councillors (2 from each ward+4 controllers+the mayor)! Each ward had about 10,000 people, I believe. It would be cool if we could go down that route again (though, I would recommend only one councillor per ward), but I can only dream.

First off, let's start with the city's 2018 population estimates for each ward.

1. Orléans   48315
2. Innes   42166
3. Barrhaven   61528
4. Kanata North   37929
5. West Carleton-March   25644
6. Stittsville   37365
7. Bay   45662
8. College   51829
9. Knoxdale-Merivale   39485
10. Gloucester-Southgate   47517
11. Beacon Hill-Cyrville   33504
12. Rideau-Vanier   49632
13. Rideau-Rockcliffe   39801
14. Somerset   41996
15. Kitchissippi   44594
16. River   48566
17. Capital   38332
18. Alta Vista   44939
19. Cumberland   50424
20. Osgoode   28279
21. Rideau-Goulbourn   30650
22. Gloucester-South Nepean   53175
23. Kanata South   50111

The rural wards are in bold. They will almost definitely get special consideration and will not be reduced. So, let's look at the rest of the city.

Next step; let's look at Ottawa's high growth areas: the outer suburbs. Basically, Ottawa has three suburban hubs that are separated from the rest of the city by the greenbelt. At present, the eastern (Orleans/Cumberland) and western (Kanata/Stittsville) have three wards each, and the southern hub (Barrhaven/Gloucester South) have two wards.

Here are the populations:
Orleans/Cumberland   140905
Kanata/Stittsville   125405
Barrhaven/Glo. South   114703

Under the current 23 ward map, the non-rural ward quotient would be 45,343.5. These hubs would this be entitled to the following number of wards:

Orleans/Cumberland 3.1
Kanata/Stittsville 2.8
Barrhaven/Glo. South 2.5

Thus lies our current problem. The south end is too large for its current two wards, but two small for three. We would have to cross the greenbelt to for a third ward, but that would entail creating a new ward somewhere in Nepean or lobbing off Gloucester South and creating a massive domino affect that would alter the boundaries of a significant number of wards within the greenbelt, and would mean removing a ward somewhere. This is of course not ideal. None of the non-rural wards are that significantly under populated (well, maybe Beacon Hill-Cyrville), and removing it would end up significantly alter the remaining wards in the east end, which can be avoided! All this to say, I would recommend adding a ward in the south end. This will force a ward to cross the greenbelt, but will ensure the rest of the map is not significantly altered.

A 24 ward map would give us an non-rural ward quotient of 43,184. This puts the suburban nodes worth these many wards:

Orleans/Cumberland 3.3
Kanata/Stittsville 2.9
Barrhaven/Glo. South 2.7

Now we're getting closer to 3 with the southern hub! This brings me to my next point:

Ottawa has two neighbourhoods that are located within the greenbelt; Bells Corners in the west and Blackburn Hamlet in the east. The neighbourhoods are best suited to be transferred from wards either inside or outside the green belt. At present, Bells Corners is in a ward that is within the greenbelt (College Ward), while Blackburn Hamlet is in a ward outside the greenbelt (Innes Ward). If we move Bells Corners (pop 9200) to the southern hub, the area now has a population of 123,900 and is worth 2.9 wards. Huzzah! And the best thing about this move is that College Ward is over populated, so removing Bells Corners drops its population to 42,600 which is pretty close to the quotient of 43k. The only drawback of this plan is that Bells Corners is rather far from Barrhaven, but as I mentioned in my last post, has been historically lumped with Barrhaven (before 2006).

And in the east end, we can make another easy move. Orleans/Cumberland now has a bit too many people for 3 wards. So, we can move Blackburn Hamlet (pop. 8,100) to Beacon Hill-Cyrville. This is another great move, as Beacon Hill-Cyrville is under populated.  This brings down the population of our eastern hub to 132,800 (3.1 wards) and the population of Beacon Hill-Cyrville up to 41,600, just a but smaller than the quotient. Huzzah!

Now that that is done, we just have to work out the new boundaries for Barrhaven/Gloucester South to accomodate its new ward, and make minor population transfers to even the populations of the remaining wards....

[Hatman 🍁]

The last redistribution report didn't mention any specific goals in terms of how far off from the electoral quotient they wanted the wards to be. There was a lot of discussion about future growth potentials and populations of the wards in 10, 15 and 20 years. Now that we're in the future, it is fun to see how far off their predictions were, but for the most part, they weren't so bad. I don't own a crystal ball, and I don't have access to the city's population projections by neighbourhood, so I am going to use the 2016 census for the most part, but keep in mind areas where there are newer developments, and make some assumptions.

But first, let's see how far off each ward is from our quotient (remember the non-rural quotient is 43,184 for a 24 ward map; the rural quotient is 28,191). Here is how far off each ward is from the quotient:

Orleans: +11.9%
Innes: -2.4% (without Blackburn Hamlet, this drops to -21.1%)
Barrhaven: +42.5% (with Bells Corners, this is +63.8%)
Kanata North: -12.2%
West Carleton-March: -9.0% (rural)
Stittsville: -13.5%
Bay: +5.7%
College: +20.0% (without Bells Corners, this drops to -1.3%)
Koxdale-Merivale: -8.6%
Gloucester-Southgate: +10.0%
Beacon Hill-Cyrville: -22.4% (with Blackburn Hamlet this increases to -3.7%)
Rideau-Vanier: +14.9%
Rideau-Rockcliffe: -7.8%
Somerset: -2.8%
Kitchissippi: +3.3%
River: +12.5%
Capital: -11.2%
Alta Vista: +4.1%
Cumberland: +16.8%
Osgoode: +0.3% (rural)
Rideau-Goulbourn: +8.7% (rural)
Gloucester-South Nepean: +23.1%
Kanata South: +16.0%

I've arbitrarily decided that each ward should be within 10% of the quotient. %s in red are below 10% and in green are above 10% of the quotient.

Wards in black shouldn't have any boundary changes, but those in green and red should see some shifts.