The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
Report To:
Council
From:
Troy McHarg, Town Clerk
Date:
May 25, 2015
Report No:
ES-015-15
Subject:
Halton Region Council Representation
Recommendation:
1. THAT Halton Region be urged to implement a
solution to the current regional representation
imbalance to be in effect no later than the start of the
2018-2022 term of Council;
2. THAT Halton Region be requested to contract a
qualified, outside consultant to undertake a
comprehensive representation review including
determination of its optimum size in accordance with
the guiding principles outlined in this report;
3. THAT, until Halton Region undertakes such a review,
Halton Region increase the size of Regional Council
by two – both assigned to the Town of Milton - to be
in effect no later than the start of the 2018-2022 term
of Council;
4. THAT, should Halton Region not adopt clause 3, that
the Region move to a system of weighted voting as
outlined in this report, with implementation no later
than the start of the 2018-2022 term of Council;
5. THAT the Government of Ontario be requested to
approve legislation that will require all municipalities
in Ontario to undertake substantive representation
reviews at least once in every three terms of Council
(12 years) and to implement the measures necessary
to maintain fair and effective representation;
6. THAT, should it appear Halton Region is unwilling or
unable to correct the current regional representation
imbalance for the start of the 2018-2022 term of
Council, that the Town of Milton petition the
Government of Ontario to impose a fair, effective,
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 2 of 15
and efficient representation solution on the Regional
Municipality of Halton;
7. THAT this report be forwarded to the Regional Clerk
for distribution to all members of Regional Council
with a request that its recommendations be fully
endorsed at the earliest possible opportunity;
8. THAT this report be circulated to lower-tier municipal
councils in Halton Region for information.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The current composition of Halton Region Council falls short of both the effective
representation and rep-by-pop standards expected in a democracy by the Constitution
and the Supreme Court of Canada. Milton is the only municipality underrepresented
when measured against those standards and the problem will get much worse over time
unless fixed.
Perhaps unintended, Halton Region resolved that the optimum size of Regional Council
is 30 for the 2018-2022 term of Council by dictating “no loss of representation” during
this current representation exercise. This would be an increase of 9 members.
Until such time as Halton Region is willing to undertake such a review that looks at all
sizing requirements and options, including costing of those options, the Town of Milton
should recommend to the Region two additional members, both assigned to Milton, be
added to Regional Council. If that is not approved then weighted voting be
implemented effective no later than the start of the 2018-2022 term of Council to ensure
that, at the very least, the current imbalance of equality of votes is fixed.
REPORT
Background
Halton Region has seen substantial growth since its formation in 1974. Initially,
Burlington was the Region’s most populous municipality and Halton Hills was larger
than Milton. This was reflected in the seat distribution at the time – Burlington (9),
Oakville (7), Halton Hills (5), Milton (3). By 1990 the population had leveled out
resulting in Burlington and Oakville being almost equal in size, as were Milton and
Halton Hills. The change to Council composition approved by the Region in May 1996,
which came into effect with the election in November 1997 mirrored this shift, giving
Oakville and Burlington 7 seats each and Milton and Halton Hills 3 seats each. This
representation is still in place today – more than 20 years later by the time this Council
term ends.
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 3 of 15
In 2007 the Region established a Regional Representation Review Sub-Committee.
The work of this committee and the background research required essentially ceased
with the approval of a resolution “THAT it be acknowledged that there will be no change
in Regional representation before the 2014 election” and Regional staff interpretation of
the effect of the resolution “as a result, the Region will not be taking any action in
relation to Regional representation during this term of Council.” In addition staff noted
“even post-November 2014…there is actually no resolution/direction from Council to do
anything at all on the question of Regional representation.”
The issue then sat until earlier this year. At the February 25, 2015 meeting of Regional
Council the following was resolved:
THAT the question of Regional representation be referred to the Local Councils
to discover under what conditions and criteria, in addition to no loss of
representation, the Local Councils would consider changes to Regional
representation, given that they have the say due to the “triple majority”
requirement, with a response requested within a four-month time period.
This report and the associated resolution adopted by Council will form the Town of
Milton’s response to Halton Region.
Much of this report utilizes content and approach in a 2013 report by the Town of Ajax
and is being used with their consent.
Discussion
Democracy is “a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the
people.” (Webster’s). 1
Democracy: The Importance of Voter Equality and Representation-by-Population
“Voter equality means that every Canadian’s vote should have the same value…This
principle is enshrined in the Canadian Constitution and is also referred to as
‘representation-by-population.’
Representation-by-population stands as the most important legal principle to apply
when designing electoral boundaries in Canada….. The principle ensures that all
Canadians are treated as equals and taken into account by their political
representatives.” 2
1
“Democracy”, Merriam-Webster Encyclopedia.
Pal, M. and Molson, M., “Moving Toward Voter Equality”, Mowat Centre, School of Public Policy and Governance,
University of Toronto, November 2012, p 3.
2
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 4 of 15
Democracy: The Right to Fair Representation
“The principle of representation-by-population is widely seen as a cornerstone of most
modern democracies… Citizens of democratic states tend to require compelling
reasons to violate the principle.” 3
Andrew Sancton, Professor of Political Science, Western University (UWO))
• Expert in the fields of Canadian local government and democratic representation.
• Three-time member of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Ontario
“One of the basic premises of representative democracy in Canada is what might
liberally be termed ‘electoral equality’ - the belief that the geographic areas used to
elect a representative should be reasonably balanced with one another in terms of
population.” 4
Robert Williams, Professor Emeritus, Political Science, University of Waterloo
• Pre-eminent consultant to Ontario municipalities on representation issues.
The Supreme Court of Canada and the Right to “Effective Representation”
The 1991 Supreme Court of Canada “Carter Decision” (Reference re Prov. Electoral
Boundaries (Sask.), [1991] 2 S.C.R. 158) is the acknowledged authority on the
responsibility entrusted to our elected officials to respect the democratic rights of all
electors and has established an ethical base that is used to guide representation
reviews at all levels of government in Canada. Although not binding on municipalities,
the Carter Decision principles have been referenced in numerous municipal council
representation studies and Ontario Municipal Board decisions.
In its decision, the Court noted that “absolute voter parity”, where all electoral districts
would contain exactly the same number of electors, is an impossible objective. Instead,
the Court maintained that electors are entitled to “effective representation.” This
principle recognizes that variances from the normal representation-by-population (repby-pop) objectives are legitimate and often necessary, on the basis that “…geography,
community history, community interests and minority representation may need to be
taken into account to ensure that our legislative assemblies effectively represent the
diversity of our social mosaic.” (p. 33)
Beyond these justified exceptions, however, the decision identified the “relative parity of
voting power” as the primary condition of effective representation (p. 32) and stated that
the “dilution of one citizen's vote as compared with another's should not be
countenanced.“ (p. 34). Also of importance to note, the Supreme Court’s decision
rejected “the specious argument that historical anomalies and abuses can be used to
justify continued anomalies and abuses. (p. 37).
In other words, unjustified
representation variances must be corrected - not perpetuated.
3
The Principle of Representation by Population in Canadian Federal Politics, Mowat Centre for Policy Innovation,
March 2010.
4
Williams, R. “We think it is the last time”. Municipal World magazine, November 2012.
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 5 of 15
The Commitment to Representation-by-Population in Canada and Ontario
In order to measure and balance the right to “effective representation” against the
common principles of “voter equality”, “representation-by-population”, and the “relative
parity of voting power”, representation reviews often apply a standard that allows the
rep-by-pop of any electoral district to vary by up to 25% from an “electoral quota” typically an average that is determined by dividing the total electors in an area by the
number of members to be elected within that area. This standard is now entrenched in
the Federal Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act (EBRA) [S.15 (2)]. The EBRA also
requires electoral boundaries commissions for each province following each decennial
(10 year) census (S. 3) to ensure that voter parity is regularly studied and maintained.
As required by the EBRA, the recent decennial Federal Electoral Boundaries
Commission reports demonstrate the Federal Government’s commitment to the
principles of voter equality and representation-by-population, primarily through the
design of reasonably balanced federal election districts in every province and territory.
The Province of Ontario also acknowledges this responsibility by using, for the most
part, the same federal districts in provincial elections.
Should Representation be Based on Elector or Population Data?
Real or perceived variances that may exist in elector bases between different areas
requires that a choice be made to use either elector or population data. As noted by
Professor Robert Williams, the leading expert on local council representation reviews in
Ontario, while legislation usually refers to electors, the emphasis on providing “effective
representation” favours the use of population data. This preference recognizes that
members of council serve not just electors but a much broader constituent base that
includes business owners, youth, new residents, non-Canadian citizens, etc., who may
not have voted in the previous election – or may not be eligible to vote at all – but many
of whom are local residents and taxpayers and certainly regarded as members of the
community. 5
Therefore, the analysis in the remainder of this report will use population data only. The
population data is derived from the Region’s Best Planning Estimates which were
developed in consultation with the four local municipalities and which were last updated
in June 2011. The Best Planning Estimates reflect the population allocated to Halton
through the Provincial Growth Plan and the distribution of that population among the
four local municipalities as reflected in the Sustainable Halton Plan (ROPA 38). The
Region has adopted and obviously accepts these population figures as a planning tool,
evidenced by the use of these numbers as the basis for its infrastructure master plans
and for multi-million dollar capital budget forecasts. Also, 2016 population figures are
used as they represent the best prediction of actual population at the time when
changes, if any, to Regional representation would take effect at the start of the 2018
term of Council as 2016 census numbers will not yet be available.
5
Williams, Robert J. “The Problem of Future Population Trends in Designing Ward Systems in Ontario.”
The Municipal Monitor, Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario, Fall 2012, pp 17-19.
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 6 of 15
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
Electoral Representation in The Regional Municipality of Halton
Representation-by-Population Has Not Been Maintained and Will Get Worse
The Municipal Act, 2001 (s. 218 & 219) provides councils with the authority to “change
the composition of council”. There is no mandatory responsibility, however, for councils
to maintain a fair and effective system of representation. This allows representation-bypopulation, the “cornerstone” of our democracy, to be placed at risk when there is an
absence of the political will - and sometimes sacrifice - required to maintain it.
The current composition of the Halton Region Council falls short of both the effective
representation and rep-by-pop standards expected in a democracy as shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1 - 2016 Halton Region Council Representation by Population
Regional
Council
Members
7
7
3
3
20 (excl.
Chair)
Population
(2016)
Oakville
Burlington
Milton
Halton Hills
198,205
175,438
124,645
57,922
Halton
556,210
Pop-perMember (2016)
% of
Pop
% of
Seats
28,315
25,063
41,548
19,307
35.6%
31.5%
22.4%
10.4%
35%
35%
15%
15%
27,811
100%
100%
Table 2 is a modified version of Table 1. The “relative parity of voting power” is
evidenced in the “Pop-per-Member” column, with the noticeable representation
distortions being further amplified in comparing the “% of Pop” and “% of Seats”
columns.
TABLE 2 - 2016 Representation by Population and Variance From Average
Population Council
(2016)
Members
Pop-perMember
(2016)
% of
Pop
% of
Seats
Variance from
Avg
(100% = 27,811)
Oakville
198,205
7
28,315
35.6%
35%
101.8%
Burlington
175,438
7
25,063
31.5%
35%
90.1%
Milton
124,645
3
41,548
22.4%
15%
149.4%
Halton
Hills
57,922
3
19,307
10.4%
15%
69.4%
Halton
556,210
20
27,811
100%
100%
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 7 of 15
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
Employing the Federal Government’s EBRA maximum 25% variance rule (see p. 5)
defines a range from 75% to 125% of the average population-per-member as providing
“relative parity of voting power”. Note in the “Variance from Avg” column that both
Milton and Halton Hills fall outside of this range.
Halton Hills currently has more than twice as many members per population as Milton.
Put another way, each citizen in Halton Hills receives the benefit of more than double
the representation than each Milton citizen. The real impact of this is gained by revisiting the Pal and Molson excerpt on “voter equality”:
“Voter equality means that every Canadian’s vote should have the same value…This
principle is enshrined in the Canadian Constitution and is also referred to as
‘representation-by-population.’
Representation-by-population stands as the most important legal principle to apply
when designing electoral boundaries in Canada….. The principle ensures that all
Canadians are treated as equals and taken into account by their political
representatives.”
The problem will get worse over time as shown in Table 3, if not fixed.
TABLE 3 - 2016 “Representation Variance” and 2021 Forecast
Pop-per- Variance
Member from Avg
(2016)
(2016)
Oakville
Population
Forecast
(2021)
Pop-perMember
(2021)
% of Pop
(2021)
% of Variance
Seats from Avg
(2021) (2021)
28,315
101.8%
221,826
31,689
35.5%
35%
101.6%
Burlington 25,063
90.1%
178,847
25,550
28.7%
35%
81.9%
Milton
41,548
149.4%
161,750
53,917
25.9%
15%
172.8%
Halton
Hills
19,307
69.4%
61,672
20,557
9.9%
15%
65.9%
Halton
27,811
624,094
31,205
100%
100%
To summarize:
 Unequal population growth caused the re-balancing of Regional Council in 1997 –
the only rebalancing since its inception over 40 years ago.
This change
demonstrated the commitment of that particular Council to maintaining fair and
effective representation – albeit with some outside motivation from the Province
through its municipal downsizing initiatives.
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 8 of 15
 Since then, substantial population growth has occurred - with some municipalities
again growing at much greater rates than others - resulting in a Regional Council
composition that is in need of re-balancing. Population projections indicate that this
imbalance will continue to get even worse in the coming years.
 Halton Region Council does not currently conform to the principles of representationby-population or effective representation as cornerstones of Canadian democracy.
The remainder of this report will focus on quantifying the true scale of the electoral
representation imbalance on the Halton Region Council and identifying options and a
fair and effective solution.
Fair and Effective Representation Options for All of Halton Region
In order to provide fair and effective representation across the entire Region, the
methodology must adhere to the principles outlined earlier in this report as backed by
the Supreme Court of Canada. First and foremost, it must be acknowledged that an
upper-tier Council composition review relies primarily on a mathematical exercise that
will calculate the fair allocation of representation. Unlike a local representation review,
where the number of wards and their boundaries may be endlessly reconfigured in the
search for the “right” solution, the fixed boundaries of the lower-tier municipalities
(versus flexible ward boundaries) do not allow for similar creative or flexible solutions in
upper-tier reviews.
1. Halton Region’s Fair Solution
Perhaps unintended and unless reconsidered, because it resolved “no loss of
representation” on February 25, 2015, Halton Region has already determined that the
optimum representation to population ratio is 1:19,307 (1 member for every 19,307
citizens in Halton Hills). This is because all other municipalities and their citizens would
be disadvantaged if the representation to population ratio were to be greater than that.
It may be helpful to first examine the fair solution that results from the mathematical
exercise, ensuring no loss of representation. Table 4 illustrates that Halton Region
Council would have to expand to 29 members (30 including the Chair) for the 20182022 term of Council to provide all municipalities in Halton with the same population per
member representation that would be enjoyed by Halton Hills. This would expand to 32
members (33 including the Chair) for the 2022-2026 term of Council.
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 9 of 15
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
TABLE 4 - Fair Representation Based on the Optimum Pop-per-Member
Oakville
Burlington
Milton
Halton Hills
Halton
2016
Population
198,205
175,438
124,645
57,922
556,210
# members @
19,307 per
10.3 = 10
9.1 = 9
6.5 = 7
3.0 = 3
29
2021
Population
221,826
178,847
161,750
61,672
624,094
# members @
19,307 per
11.5 = 12
9.3 = 9
8.4 = 8
3.2 = 3
32
While this model would ensure fairness, it would almost certainly be rejected. Unwieldy
size; increased costs; and significant Council composition, financial and other impacts
for the local municipalities that are assigned the additional members - including ward
boundary reviews - would probably doom consideration of this scenario to failure – and
the representation imbalance would continue until the 2022 term of Council.
2. Addressing the Disadvantaged Only, While Ensuring No Loss of
Representation
Tables 1 through 3 have demonstrated that Milton is the only municipality currently
disadvantaged and disadvantaged out to 2021. A less costly option would see only
Milton receiving additional members. Table 5 below shows the impact if Milton were to
receive one additional member at Regional Council.
TABLE 5 - 2016 Representation by Population With 4 Milton Members
Population
(2016)
Oakville
Burlington
Milton
Halton Hills
198,205
175,438
124,645
57,922
Halton
556,210
Regional
Council
Members
7
7
4
3
21 (excl.
Chair)
Pop-perMember (2016)
% of
Pop
% of
Seats
28,315
25,063
31,161
19,307
35.6%
31.5%
22.4%
10.4%
33%
33%
19%
14%
26,246
100%
100%
Table 6 is a modified version of Table 5. The “relative parity of voting power” is
evidenced in the “Pop-per-Member” column, with the noticeable representation
distortions being further amplified in comparing the “% of Pop” and “% of Seats”
columns.
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 10 of 15
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
TABLE 6 - TABLE 5 Plus Variance From Average With 4 Milton Members
Population Council
(2016)
Members
Pop-perMember
(2016)
% of
Pop
% of
Seats
Variance from
Avg
(100% = 26,246)
Oakville
198,205
7
28,315
35.6%
33%
107.9%
Burlington
175,438
7
25,063
31.5%
33%
95.5%
Milton
124,645
4
31,161
22.4%
19%
118.7%
Halton
Hills
57,922
3
19,307
10.4%
14%
73.6%
Halton
556,210
21
26,246
100%
100%
Employing the Federal Government’s EBRA maximum 25% variance rule (see p. 5)
defines a range from 75% to 125% of the average population-per-member as providing
“relative parity of voting power”. Note in the “Variance from Avg” column that all
municipalities fall within the range, with the exception of Halton Hills (albeit slightly).
With adding only one additional Milton member for the 2018 term of Council, not only
would it not comply for the 2018 term of Council, Regional Council composition will
continue to fall short of both the effective representation and rep-by-pop standards
expected in a democracy out past 2021 as shown in Table 7. Note that both Milton and
Halton Hills would again fall outside of the acceptable variance…by a significant margin.
TABLE 7 - 2021 Forecast With 4 Milton Members
PopPopulation
% of
per% of Pop
Forecast
Seats
Member (2021)
(2021)
(2021)
(2021)
Oakville
Variance from
Avg
(2021)
221,826
31,689
35.5%
33.3%
106.6%
Burlington 178,847
25,550
28.7%
33.3%
86.0%
Milton
161,750
40,438
25.9%
19.1%
136.1%
Halton
Hills
61,672
20,557
9.9%
14.3%
69.2%
Halton
624,094
29,719
100%
100%
The only solution that does not cause a drastic increase to the size of Regional Council
that also conforms to the democratic principles of representation-by-population and
effective representation set by the Constitution and Supreme Court of Canada comes
from adding two additional members from Milton to Regional Council for the 2018 term
of Council as shown in Table 8 below.
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 11 of 15
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
TABLE 8 - With 5 Milton Members
Population Council
(2016)
Members
Pop-perMember
(2016)
% of
Pop
% of
Seats
Variance from
Avg
(100% = 25,282)
Oakville
198,205
7
28,315
35.6%
31.8%
112.0%
Burlington
175,438
7
25,063
31.5%
31.8%
99.1%
Milton
124,645
5
24,929
22.4%
22.7%
98.6%
Halton
Hills
57,922
3
19,307
10.4%
13.6%
76.4%
Halton
556,210
22
25,282
100%
100%
Employing the Federal Government’s EBRA maximum 25% variance rule (see p. 5)
defines a range from 75% to 125% of the average population-per-member as providing
“relative parity of voting power”. Note in the “Variance from Avg” column that all
municipalities fall within the acceptable range.
With adding two additional Milton members for the 2018 term of Council, Regional
Council composition would comply with both the effective representation and rep-by-pop
standards expected in a democracy for the 2018 term of Council, but it would again fall
short of both the effective representation and rep-by-pop standards expected in a
democracy out past 2021 as shown in Table 9. Note that Halton Hills again falls outside
of the standard (albeit slightly).
TABLE 9 - 2021 Forecast With 5 Milton Members
PopPopulation
% of
per% of Pop
Forecast
Seats
Member (2021)
(2021)
(2021)
(2021)
Oakville
Variance from
Avg
(2021)
221,826
31,689
35.5%
31.8%
111.7%
Burlington 178,847
25,550
28.7%
31.8%
90.1%
Milton
161,750
32,350
25.9%
22.7%
114.0%
Halton
Hills
61,672
20,557
9.9%
13.6%
72.5%
Halton
624,094
28,368
100%
100%
At what point would Halton Region decide that continuing to add members of Regional
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 12 of 15
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
Council - without undertaking a comprehensive Regional Council representation review
to determine its optimum size - is not in the best interests of the citizens of Halton?
Until such time as Halton Region is willing to undertake such a review that looks at all
sizing requirements and options, the Town of Milton should recommend to the Region,
the addition of 2 members – both assigned to Milton. Barring that, an alternative
solution to ensure that, at the very least, the current imbalance of equality of votes is
fixed.
3. Weighted Voting
Weighted voting is already in place in a number of upper tier municipalities in Ontario
and Canada. Instead of adding members to Regional Council, if the Region were to
move to weighted voting using the optimum representation already set by Halton
Region, the increased representation would not come in the form of additional bodies on
Regional Council, rather it would be replaced by additional votes as shown in Table 10.
TABLE 10 - Fair Weighted Votes Based on the Optimum Pop-per-Vote
Oakville
Burlington
Milton
Halton Hills
Halton
2016
Population
198,205
175,438
124,645
57,922
556,210
# votes @
19,307 per
10.3 = 10
9.1 = 9
6.5 = 7
3.0 = 3
29 (30 incl.
Chair)
2021
Population
221,826
178,847
161,750
61,672
624,094
# votes @
19,307 per
11.5 = 12
9.3 = 9
8.4 = 8
3.2 = 3
32 (33 incl.
Chair)
As an example of a weighted voting system, the Vancouver Regional District has a
system in place which generally is as follows:
•
•
•
•
Where there is more than one member for a lower tier municipality, votes get
divided as equally as possible among lower tier members on the Regional
District. Knowing that all votes won’t be equally divisible for the number of
members for each municipality, the exact number of votes for each member is
established by resolution of each lower tier Council.
All votes are weighted votes but whether a motion is adopted or not usually is
accurately determined by the Chair and/or Clerk without the need for the Clerk to
go through the weighted voting tally.
If a recorded vote is called or the count challenged, then the Clerk must tally the
vote.
Review of distribution of votes is undertaken with each census.
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
•
•
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 13 of 15
Each lower tier municipality receives one vote for every population up to 20,000.
Once population reaches over 20,000 an additional vote is assigned. This
happens at every 20,000 threshold.
Each lower tier municipality has one member for every population up to 100,000.
Once population reaches over 100,000 an additional member is assigned. This
happens at every 100,000 threshold.
The last bullet ensures that additional members get added as population grows, even
within the weighted voting system. Weighted voting without balancing the number of
members would not cure problems associated with unbalanced representation such as
access to elected representatives by citizens, Councillor workloads, and imbalanced
cost per municipality representative but at the very least it gives residents of all of the
municipalities equality of votes.
To reiterate, weighted voting fixes the imbalance in equality of votes. Weighted voting
without instituting fairness in member allotment continues the unfair aspects of
imbalanced access to elected representatives by citizens, constituent workloads for
members and the cost per municipality per regional rep. The recommended solution in
this report is being put forward as stop gap measure to ensure fair representation is in
place for the start of the 2018 term of Council and until such time as the Region
undertakes a comprehensive review.
Because there are a myriad of options when establishing a weighted voting system,
Regional staff would need to research and recommend to Regional Council details of a
recommended weighted voting method for Halton, if Regional Council were to resolve
approval of recommendation 4 in this report.
Guiding Principles For a Comprehensive Regional Council Representation
Review
Having established that Regional Council bears a responsibility to provide fair and
effective representation, and that the current composition of the Council does not meet
those standards, a comprehensive review of Halton Region Council representation
should employ the following guiding principles:
1. All electors, residents and taxpayers in the Region must be valued equally. In
particular, the rep-by-pop objectives of “voter equality” and “relative parity of voting
power” are best achieved by identifying the smallest possible representation variance
across all of the four local municipalities.
2. The minimum or total size of Council should not be arbitrarily decided in advance.
Instead, the determination of a fair, effective and efficient Council size and
distribution of representation is best determined by applying an optimum population-
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 14 of 15
per-member ratio based on factors such as Councillor workload, cost of Council, etc.
3. Any solution to correct the imbalance in regional representation must be effective for
the start of the 2018-2022 Council term.
Another perspective is to simply ask: “If Halton Region Council was being created for
the first time now, how would representation be distributed?”
If the Region Refuses to Act….The Province Must
“Regional governments in Ontario have always had to struggle for legitimacy. Many
citizens have trouble understanding their purpose and function. I can think of few better
ways for them to undermine their own legitimacy than by refusing to reform their voting
systems in accordance with the principle of representation-by-population. If they can’t
uphold this principle, then I would urge the provincial legislature to do it for them.”
Andrew Sancton, Professor of Political Science, Western University (UWO)
As noted in the Background section of this report, Halton Region has failed to correct
any representation imbalance since this issue was raised in 2007. In order to take
effect for the next regular election, changes to Council composition must be finalized by
December 31 of the year prior to the election. Therefore, in order to be in effect for the
October 2018 elections, any changes to Regional Council and/or lower-tier Councils
must be completed by December 31, 2017. Approval requires satisfaction of the “triple
majority” criteria in the Municipal Act, 2001 (S. 218 & 219), meaning that a majority of
Regional Council plus a majority of the lower-tier councils (3 of 4) that also represent a
majority of all the electors in the Region, must support the proposed changes.
Depending on the process used by Halton Region from here on in to arrive at a decision
in this matter, it is quite possible that the time already lost from this term by the time all
lower tier municipalities provide their input to Halton Region makes the ability to
determine and approve changes at both the upper-tier – and, in particular, any ensuing
changes then required at the lower-tier level – unlikely to be achieved by the end of
2017. At this point, it would take the strong will of Halton Region and the cooperation of
all lower-tier councils and the Ontario Government to expedite a correction of the
representation imbalance identified in this report by the end of 2017. This is unless
Halton Region and the local municipalities agree to assign two additional members to
Milton forthwith or weighted voting is adopted until such time as the Region is able to
complete a comprehensive Regional Council representation review.
Should it appear that Halton Region is unwilling or unable to have a fair system in place
by the end of 2016 to ensure adequate time for the local municipalities to review and
change their systems and receive Ontario Government approval, if required, by the end
of 2017, staff would recommend that Council formally request the Ontario Government
to unilaterally impose a fair and effective solution in time for the October 2018 elections.
The Corporation of the
TOWN OF MILTON
Report #:
ES-015-15
Page 15 of 15
The Province should also amend the Municipal Act, 2001 to require all municipalities to
undertake substantive representation reviews and implement the changes required to
maintain fair and effective representation, at least once every three terms of Council (12
years). To ensure compliance, these reviews and any composition changes should also
be subject to appeal to the OMB.
CONCLUSION:
Representation on Halton Region Council has become severely imbalanced. In
particular, Milton’s citizens are significantly under-represented and have become
disadvantaged in the Region’s decision-making and in their access to political
representation.
As noted by Dr. Sancton, representation-by-population is the cornerstone of our
cherished Canadian democracy (p. 4). Citizens trust their elected representatives to
serve them fairly and with respect in all matters. Measuring voter equality is an
important test of our elected members’ commitment to providing good government.
The time is now to rebalance regional representation to ensure that fair and effective
representation is provided to all electors, residents and taxpayers in the Regional
Municipality of Halton.
Relationship to the Strategic Plan
Responsible, Cost Effective and Accountable Local Government
Financial Impact
None associated with the recommendations in this report.
Respectfully submitted,
Troy McHarg
Town Clerk
For questions, please contact:
Troy McHarg Ext 2132
Attachments
None
CAO Approval
William Mann, MCIP, RPP, OALA, CSLA, MCIF, RPF
Chief Administrative Officer