Canadian Redistribution - Federal, Provincial, Municipal

[Hatman 🍁]

Much, much better

[Njall]

I like it as well.

[Njall]

Here is my new Calgary proposal, using the Commission's proposal as a starting point and working from there: http://goo.gl/9aps2w.

Primarily, I was attempting to fix as many community splits as possible, as well as making sure no riding was bisected by Deerfoot Trail in North Calgary (the presence of a major expressway with wide swaths of industrial area on both sides means that ridings shouldn't cross the boundary, if possible, in my opinion).

As I've previously written here, the commission's interim report made me realize that the biggest weakness of my previous map was that several suburban ridings, particularly in the north, already had above-average populations. This would mean that after 10 years of further growth in the city, populations in these ridings would be really off-balance (much the same as the current Calgary-South East riding, which essentially grew to be twice the provincial median population since the 2009/10 Commission).

As a result of this, you may notice two funky-looking riding boundaries in North Calgary. The first, between Calgary-Beddington and Calgary-Panorama Hills, actually looks that way because it adheres to existing community boundaries. A minority part of Hidden Valley is located east of Beddington Trail, and this is rejoined with the rest of Hidden Valley in Calgary-Beddington. The community of Country Hills Village (north of Country Hills Blvd between Harvest Hills Blvd and Coventry Hills Blvd) is also given to Calgary-Beddington. Both of these changes are done to give Calgary-Panorama Hills a below-average population to account for future population growth north of Stoney Trail.

The second odd boundary, between Calgary-McCall and Calgary-Falconridge, looks that way because Martindale would need to be split in order to give the two ridings appropriate population levels. Because of how Martindale was designed, there's no logical road to use as a north-south or east-west divider, so I chose to have the boundary follow Martindale Dr and Martindale Blvd. However, it occurs to me now that a better boundary may be the C-train line that runs through the community, so I may adjust the boundary later.

[Krago]

I have upgraded my proposal to make some improvements in Central Alberta.

https://goo.gl/DcCPF0

The highlights are:
- Red Deer contains two divisions entirely within the city limits
- Sylvan Lake is returned to the renamed Innisfail-Sylvan Lake
- Sundre rejoins the renamed Rimbey-Rocky Mountain House-Sundre
- Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills regains Carbon, Beiseker and Irricana
- the boundary through Airdrie now follows Highway 2
- Lacombe-Ponoka loses some territory near Gull Lake and a chunk of Wetaskiwin County, and gains the area along Highway 21 from Bashaw north to Duhamel
- Battle River-Vegreville and Drumheller-Stettler both become smaller in area and population

[Krago]

Here is my new Calgary proposal, using the Commission's proposal as a starting point and working from there: http://goo.gl/9aps2w.

Primarily, I was attempting to fix as many community splits as possible, as well as making sure no riding was bisected by Deerfoot Trail in North Calgary (the presence of a major expressway with wide swaths of industrial area on both sides means that ridings shouldn't cross the boundary, if possible, in my opinion).

As I've previously written here, the commission's interim report made me realize that the biggest weakness of my previous map was that several suburban ridings, particularly in the north, already had above-average populations. This would mean that after 10 years of further growth in the city, populations in these ridings would be really off-balance (much the same as the current Calgary-South East riding, which essentially grew to be twice the provincial median population since the 2009/10 Commission).

As a result of this, you may notice two funky-looking riding boundaries in North Calgary. The first, between Calgary-Beddington and Calgary-Panorama Hills, actually looks that way because it adheres to existing community boundaries. A minority part of Hidden Valley is located east of Beddington Trail, and this is rejoined with the rest of Hidden Valley in Calgary-Beddington. The community of Country Hills Village (north of Country Hills Blvd between Harvest Hills Blvd and Coventry Hills Blvd) is also given to Calgary-Beddington. Both of these changes are done to give Calgary-Panorama Hills a below-average population to account for future population growth north of Stoney Trail.

The second odd boundary, between Calgary-McCall and Calgary-Falconridge, looks that way because Martindale would need to be split in order to give the two ridings appropriate population levels. Because of how Martindale was designed, there's no logical road to use as a north-south or east-west divider, so I chose to have the boundary follow Martindale Dr and Martindale Blvd. However, it occurs to me now that a better boundary may be the C-train line that runs through the community, so I may adjust the boundary later.

Thanks for sharing.  Your map looks great.  Do you have the population figures for these ridings divisions?


P.S.  Are you preparing to give Calgary-McCall a C-section?

[Njall]

Here is my new Calgary proposal, using the Commission's proposal as a starting point and working from there: http://goo.gl/9aps2w.

Primarily, I was attempting to fix as many community splits as possible, as well as making sure no riding was bisected by Deerfoot Trail in North Calgary (the presence of a major expressway with wide swaths of industrial area on both sides means that ridings shouldn't cross the boundary, if possible, in my opinion).

As I've previously written here, the commission's interim report made me realize that the biggest weakness of my previous map was that several suburban ridings, particularly in the north, already had above-average populations. This would mean that after 10 years of further growth in the city, populations in these ridings would be really off-balance (much the same as the current Calgary-South East riding, which essentially grew to be twice the provincial median population since the 2009/10 Commission).

As a result of this, you may notice two funky-looking riding boundaries in North Calgary. The first, between Calgary-Beddington and Calgary-Panorama Hills, actually looks that way because it adheres to existing community boundaries. A minority part of Hidden Valley is located east of Beddington Trail, and this is rejoined with the rest of Hidden Valley in Calgary-Beddington. The community of Country Hills Village (north of Country Hills Blvd between Harvest Hills Blvd and Coventry Hills Blvd) is also given to Calgary-Beddington. Both of these changes are done to give Calgary-Panorama Hills a below-average population to account for future population growth north of Stoney Trail.

The second odd boundary, between Calgary-McCall and Calgary-Falconridge, looks that way because Martindale would need to be split in order to give the two ridings appropriate population levels. Because of how Martindale was designed, there's no logical road to use as a north-south or east-west divider, so I chose to have the boundary follow Martindale Dr and Martindale Blvd. However, it occurs to me now that a better boundary may be the C-train line that runs through the community, so I may adjust the boundary later.

Thanks for sharing.  Your map looks great.  Do you have the population figures for these ridings divisions?


P.S.  Are you preparing to give Calgary-McCall a C-section?

Rough population figures (from the 2016 municipal census), with deviations from the provincial median:
Calgary-Acadia: 45,123 (-3.4%)
Calgary-Beddington: 48,712 (+4.3%)
Calgary-Bow: 47,909 (+2.6%)
Calgary-Buffalo: 52,408 (+12.2%)
Calgary-Cross: 47,734 (+2.2%)
Calgary-Currie: 51,844 (+11.0%)
Calgary-East: 51,546 (+10.4%)
Calgary-Elbow: 47,438 (+1.6%)
Calgary-Falconridge: 47,984 (+2.8%)
Calgary-Fish Creek: 47,059 (+0.8%)
Calgary-Foothills: 43,448 (-7.0%)
Calgary-Glenmore: 52,962 (+13.4%)
Calgary-Greenway: 47,049 (+0.8%)
Calgary-Hawkwood: 54,566 (+16.9%)
Calgary-Hays: 42,874 (-8.2%)
Calgary-Klein: 55,144 (+18.1%)
Calgary-Lougheed: 42,618 (-8.7%)
Calgary-McCall: 40,549 (-13.2%)
Calgary-Mountain View: 49,572 (+6.2%)
Calgary-North West: 48,373 (+3.6%)
Calgary-Panorama Hills: 43,249 (-7.4%)
Calgary-Quarry Park: 45,299 (-3.0%)
Calgary-Shaw: 44,051 (-5.7%)
Calgary-South East: 39,964 (-14.4%)
Calgary-Varsity: 51,463 (+10.2%)
Calgary-West: 46,233 (-1.0%)


Also, apologies, I don't know if I understand the C-section comment I must be tired.

[Krago]

Thanks for the numbers, Njall.

Which do you prefer:

(a) leave my proposal as-is, with an urban Stony Plain-Spruce Grove seat (51,255) and a rural Parkland-Lac Ste. Anne seat (44,803); or

(b) separate the cities (towns?) into a Stony Plain-Lac Ste. Anne division (48,879) and a Spruce Grove division (47,179) ?

[Hatman 🍁]

I prefer the donut style. I don't like the shape of the Stony Plain division.

[Njall]

I prefer the donut style. I don't like the shape of the Stony Plain division.

I'd say stick with the donut as well. I'm not too familiar with that area so there might be a legitimate historical reason for why the two municipalities are divided between two districts, but personally I've always thought it didn't make sense to not group both of them together in one district when their borders are literally touching.

[Krago]

Oshawa rejected that 'pinstriped' ward proposal in favour of something sensible.

[Hatman 🍁]

Does this mean Oshawa is moving to a ward model in how it votes? I think previously they had wards, but they were meaningless. Also, does the size of council change?

[Krago]

Here's one more alternative.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1PKUBzfLAhGXFB30TaGDH7xXprMg&usp=sharing

- Stony Plain and Spruce Grove are placed in separate divisions
- Stony Plain extends west to take in the rest of Parkland County
- Barrhead-Westlock gives up Whitecourt to West Yellowhead and adds Lac Ste. Anne County

[Njall]

Here's one more alternative.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1PKUBzfLAhGXFB30TaGDH7xXprMg&usp=sharing

- Stony Plain and Spruce Grove are placed in separate divisions
- Stony Plain extends west to take in the rest of Parkland County
- Barrhead-Westlock gives up Whitecourt to West Yellowhead and adds Lac Ste. Anne County

That could actually work better. It occurred to me yesterday that a distinct weakness with placing Stony Plain and Spruce Grove into the same division would be that, more than likely, they would have to be split at the next redistribution anyways. The Commission is really trying to take future growth into account, so I think they'd be more favourable to an arrangement like this one.

[Hatman 🍁]

Adding Whitecourt in with West Yellowhead is very awkward.  However, the Stony Plain / Spruce Gove split there is better than your earlier split.

[Krago]

The Far North Electoral Boundaries Commission has released their preliminary report.



What are the odds that the first MPP from Mushkegowuk will be a white francophone, and not an indigenous person?

[Hatman 🍁]

The Far North Electoral Boundaries Commission has released their preliminary report.



What are the odds that the first MPP from Mushkegowuk will be a white francophone, and not an indigenous person?

Oh, so they went with one of the more hairbrained options. OK then. Timmins gets to be its own riding now? jfc

[Hatman 🍁]

What are the odds that the first MPP from Mushkegowuk will be a white francophone, and not an indigenous person?

The parties will probably nominate Aboriginals, so not as likely as a cynical person might think. But whites will make up a majority of people who actually cast votes, that is for certain.

(ETA: oh, the riding will be majority francophone? Then yes, the parties will probably nominate a White francophone then)

And the one good thing about this is that it probably means two extra NDP seats

[MaxQue]

The Far North Electoral Boundaries Commission has released their preliminary report.



What are the odds that the first MPP from Mushkegowuk will be a white francophone, and not an indigenous person?

Well, it's only 15% indigenous.

[toaster]

Timmins gets to be its own riding.  Will return to be a true Lib/NDP tossup, much like Sudbury is.  This will last until the next redistribution, where the rest of the North will likely lose an MPP. 
What this does is create the most Francophone riding in the province, and someone French from Kap/Hearst will be able to run.  Here is a picture from Gilles Bisson with the population of Fr / Aborg. in each "new" riding.

[lilTommy]

Timmins gets to be its own riding.  Will return to be a true Lib/NDP tossup, much like Sudbury is.  This will last until the next redistribution, where the rest of the North will likely lose an MPP.  
What this does is create the most Francophone riding in the province, and someone French from Kap/Hearst will be able to run.  Here is a picture from Gilles Bisson with the population of Fr / Aborg. in each "new" riding.

Interesting that they went with the 4 options, but this does go with the communities of interest since it creates 1 majority Indigenous riding and 1 majority Francophone one.

Actually, going by 2014 results Timmins would be an NDP/PC riding, but NDP dominant. The PC won about 10 polls, the OLP only 1, the rest were won by the NDP. I don't have the actual city figures, but looks like it was close though between the PCs/OLP for second in most NDP won polls.

Mushkegowuk might be interesting; The Liberals won all but one of the Hearst polls, the NDP won all the Kapuskasing polls. Now the NDP won every other poll but two (and one was a tie) but Hearst being the second largest area (5000+ people) could make this mildly competitive for the OLP. There is a good chance the MPP could be both Francophone and Indigenous, I think that would be great! (hint hint NDP lol)

Kiiwetinong, no contest really here, the OLP won two polls, everywhere else went NDP. BUT this area of the riding went Liberal federally, in particular Red Lake. Provincially went NDP but federally went Liberal. So it has the potential again to be an OLP/NDP riding. But the rural areas are dominated by NDP won polls, except for an OLP corner in the west of the riding around Sandy Lake. (anyone know why? its consistently Liberal Prov & Fed.)

Kenora - Rainy River looks like, again based on 2014, a PC/NDP riding... NDP dominated though like Timmins. The PCs look to have won about a dozen or so polls, and the OLP none. Even when we look federally the Conservatives do really well in Kenora and Dryden more so then the Liberals and NDP. Provincially those communities went NDP.

For the NDP, best for Sarah Campbell and Gilles Bisson, the two MPPs, to run in the more urban areas. Campbell in Kenora - Rainy River and Bisson in Timmins. Gives the chance for the new MPPs to be Indigenous and having incumbency advantage in the more competitive cities/more urban areas.

[toaster]

The Liberal candidate the last time was from Hearst, that is why the Liberal numbers were inflated there last time.  That explains not only why they did so well in Hearst, but also why the Liberals did so poorly in Timmins, in addition to the ONTC issue.  You can find articles where prominent Liberals form Timmins were supporting the PCs in an "Anything but NDP" kind of coalition here. So I don't think the results of that election are telling of the actual Liberal/PC support.  Traditionally, Timmins has been a NDP/LIB tossup.
If you look at the last federal election, the Liberals almost won Timmins proper (with a terrible candidate who has since embarrassed himself)

[lilTommy]

The Liberal candidate the last time was from Hearst, that is why the Liberal numbers were inflated there last time.  That explains not only why they did so well in Hearst, but also why the Liberals did so poorly in Timmins, in addition to the ONTC issue.  You can find articles where prominent Liberals form Timmins were supporting the PCs in an "Anything but NDP" kind of coalition here. So I don't think the results of that election are telling of the actual Liberal/PC support.  Traditionally, Timmins has been a NDP/LIB tossup.
If you look at the last federal election, the Liberals almost won Timmins proper (with a terrible candidate who has since embarrassed himself)

So really was a situational result in 2014. Thanks! The PCs have been polling very well in the north though, so again we might see some more tactical voting OLP->PC in more anyone-but-NDP voting.

[adma]

The traditional Franco-Ontarian Liberal lean means that the Liberals have *always* overperformed in Hearst.  Kap, on the other hand, was a PC stronghold in 2011--their mayor was the candidate that year, and he really tried to give Bisson a run for his money (while the Grits offered little better than a paper campaign).

It really depends on the candidate dynamics.

[Hatman 🍁]

Timmins, just like every other major city in Northern Ontario (except maybe North Bay... which is actually larger than Timmins, but would unfairly not get its own riding like Timmins) has a solid NDP base and a solid anti-NDP base that swing between the Tories and Liberals.

[Hatman 🍁]

For an  historical perspective, the Timmins-James Bay area was divided into two ridings for much of the last century between the Timmins dominated Cochrane South riding and Cochrane North, which would have essentially the same borders as the proposed Mushkegowuk riding (except the town of Cochrane, which was in Cochrane North but would remain in Timiskaming-Cochrane in this proposal). 

Perhaps unfairly, the First Nations communities in the proposed Kiiwetinong riding have historically been split up arbitrarily between the Kenora and Thunder Bay (later Lake Nipigon) ridings.