A review of Rocky View County (RVC)’s electoral boundaries will be undertaken prior to the next municipal general election in October 2017. The review will recommend adjustments based on distribution of population and will include the possibility of reviewing the position of an elected mayor at large to represent the County as a whole for an election term.
According to Karen Jiang with RVC’s legislative services, any changes to the electoral boundaries must be adopted and endorsed by a municipal bylaw by April 20, 2017 to be in effect by the time of the election. A budget adjustment of $32,600 was approved on April 26 for the review, and RVC council approved a Terms of Reference to guide the review on June 14.
The last major review undertaken by the County was in 2000, when Jiang said the number of divisions decreased from 10 to the current nine divisions. In 2010, she added, a minor review was conducted that primarily adjusted the boundaries of Divisions 7 and 8 in response to the Bearspaw Area Structure Plan.
“The last County census was completed in 2013, and the total population of the county was 38,055, which was a population increase of 34 per cent since 2000,” Jiang said. “This census will be the main set of data used to complete the review, because the County census comprises the most accurate point-based data the County is able to obtain, and therefore will allow for a more precise analysis.”
The first part of the review will focus on “realigning electoral boundaries” to “balance out” the County’s population for effective representation, and Jiang said this will be completed and implemented prior to the October 2017 election. The second part will focus on determining a new “model of governance for a growing County,” and will be conducted after October 2017 with a new Terms of Reference.
“Based on the best practices of other municipalities, discussions of governance may require a form of public engagement, where the public has a role to share or lead the decision-making process,” Jiang said.
The main rationale for the review, according to Jiang, is recognizing that five out of the County’s nine divisions currently have a population deviation of plus or minus 25 per cent of what the average population distribution should be in each division. This deviation allowance is based on a legal precedent of effective representation that currently informs electoral best practices at the federal, provincial and municipal level.
“It is the recognition that although an even distribution of population among all electoral divisions is ideal, it is not practically achievable and that some level of population deviation is acceptable if justifications can be made,” Jiang said.
The second rationale for the review is also based on municipal best practices, which indicate an electoral boundary review should be completed every two electoral terms. The County has now gone through five election terms since the last review. Jiang added since 2010, four annexation agreements have occurred, of which the boundary changes are not reflected in the current bylaw.
A motion to approve the Terms of Reference was carried 8-1, with opposition from Councillor Jerry Arshinoff.
“There have been so many developments approved that it is exceptionally likely that this will be completely out of date immediately after it’s implemented, unless all of those developments go bankrupt,” Arshinoff said. “I do agree with the merit of looking into electoral boundaries, but essentially it’s a waste of money because we are going to have to redo it. My suggestion is that we don’t do this, at least not before the next election – wait two or three years.”
