Rocky View County (RVC) will maintain the nine current electoral boundaries through the October 2017 municipal general election, following a council vote at a meeting Nov. 22. Administration has been directed to develop a policy to guide changes to electoral boundaries in the future, and council may consider new boundaries at a later date.
Proposed amendments to the electoral boundaries were initially presented at a council meeting in October, following a review of the current bylaw which began in June. Amendments to the bylaw included a council comprised of either seven or nine electoral divisions, in an attempt to provide more effective representation to County residents.
A public information session was proposed at the Oct. 25 meeting to inform residents of the proposed changes, but had not occurred by the time the item was brought back to council at a meeting Nov. 22. Administration’s report included a number of emails received from residents who opposed any changes to the bylaw without the opportunity for public engagement.
Councillor Liz Breakey moved to allow members of the public to speak to the proposed amendments, as she said this may be “the most important decision we make this term, in terms of representing our constituents.” Her motion was carried by a vote of 7-2, with opposition from Councillors Bruce Kendall and Eric Lowther.
“These changes should not be taken lightly – they should only be done after meaningful public consultation. Here we are today without any proposed mandated public input,” said Bearspaw resident Samanntha Wright, on behalf of Rocky View Forward (RVF). “Promising meaningful, transparent public consultations and then failing to deliver on those promises removed any legitimacy for council to make changes to the visual boundaries, in my opinion.”
According to Wright, Rocky View Forward has been unable to determine how RVC administration achieved the population numbers indicated in the report, and failed to find any legal justification to require the proposed amendments to the electoral divisions. Wright added each of administration’s proposed amendments come with distinct pros and cons, and said this makes the need for an “in-depth, overall analysis” of each option “imperative.”
“While I’m sure there is an explanation, it doesn’t help the process appear transparent,” she said. “RVF believes that the current analysis ignores important factors that go into achieving effective representation. Given the absence of meaningful public consultation, we believe that council should not be making changes that alter existing community relationships.”
Wright said RVF would like to see RVC use an independent process for reviewing and establishing electoral division boundaries on an annual basis, to eliminate any perception of bias or vested interest, stating “residents would be much more accepting of these changes if they came from an impartial body, after public consultation.”
“We have some significant inequities in population, and if we just walk away from this and say ‘status quo,’ I personally find that a bit tough to take,” said Councillor Eric Lowther. “I think we have a responsibility to try to ensure some level of democratic representation. We do need to address this inequity.”
Councillor Rolly Ashdown moved administration carry forward the Terms of Reference approved in June to seek public opinion for new divisional boundaries and governance structure, for consideration by the end of 2018. His motion was carried by a vote of 6-3 with Councillors Lois Habberfield, Margaret Bahcheli and Reeve Greg Boehlke in opposition.
“This gives council a year of input, and it gives whoever the new council is also a year of input, and then the decision can be made three years before the next election,” Ashdown said.
Kendall added a motion arising, requesting administration prepare clear policy around establishing electoral boundaries. His motion was carried unanimously.
“I really do think this is incredibly valid as a basis for discussion, but it’s also momentous change,” Breakey said. “I do think the public consultation, frustrating though it may be, is necessary in our county for reasons of healthy discourse, and we need to allow time for that.”
