HomeMy WebLinkAboutProposed Alternate MapsAriana Nielsen
From:
Sent:
To:
subject -
Attachments:
Layne Johnson
November 30, 2020 10:41 AM
Konstantin Glants; Todd Green; Susan Yokoyama; Ariana Nielsen
FW- New map for Electoral Boundaries
Emai1002 Jpg
Just passing along the latest on this matter FYI
Layne
From; Layne Johnson
Sent: November 30 2020 10:40 AM
To: Holly Johnson
Cc: Councillors <Councillors(@neweilmail.ca>;
Subject: FW: New map for Electoral Boundaries
nawallmail ra�>-
Holly: Thanks for the submission. This email and map attachment is being circulated to Council this morning and will
also be included as part of the feedback received when Council formally considers 2 d reading of the bylaw on Dec. 10.
Regarding the matter of a meeting for the purpose of refining the map submitted, if the group wants to schedule a
meeting, we are certainly willing to arrange one at a mutually convenient time. Until Council formally discusses this
matter on Dec. 10, no indication can be given one way or the other regarding their level of interest in further exploring
an option for 9 electoral divisions_ With that being the ease, let us know if the group wants to meet for further
discussion regarding the latest map submitted.
As you have stated, various options for the size of Council have been discussed in the past, however; the formal
direction Council provided on Oct. 8 was to prepare map options based on a 7 member Council. Their interest in a 7
member Council was reiterated on Oct. 22 when Council approved a decision to proceed with a public consultation
process that featured different alternatives for 7 divisions.
Council appreciates the input submitted by yourself and others who have taken the time and effort to provide much
needed input. All feedback received will be given thoughtful consideration by Council during their decision making
process on a matter of considerable importance to the future governance of the County.
Layne Johnson
From: B & H Johnson
Sent: November 29, 2020 6:25 PM
To: Layne Johnson <iohnsonl@newellmail.ca>
Cc:
Subject: New map for Electoral Boundaries
Hi Layne
Attached you will find a map that divides the County into 9 electoral divisions. There are a couple reasons I developed a
9 map, and they are as follows:
You developed 3 variations of 7 divisions, and I took a look at it too— there is simply no way to create 7 divisions
without dividing communities and creating rural-nonrural representation issues.
In looking back to old issues of the Brooks Bulletin, there are two articles by Sandra Stanway in early January, where the
County Councillors discussed 9 divisions. So, it should not be surprising to you or the County Councillors that people
were upset to see 7 divisions as the only option given at the end of October after reading the January VL Bulletin, "At
their final meeting of the year council agreed to reduce the number of divisions to 9, which would eliminate one
councillor...". Moving from 10 to 7 is a significant change. 9 divisions should still be on the table and amendments to
the bylaw could be made.
9 is an odd number, which you told me would be acceptable to the Province.
9 works quite well, although I can only go so far without more information from yourself on populations within
townships. However, I believe it to be a big improvement over the 7 divisions.
In the spirit that "Council is very much open to alternatives and hopes that the collective input received through this
consultation process will enhance the end result for the benefit of all County residents" as you stated in an earlier e-
mail, could you please forward this map to the County Councillors for their thoughts? Our group would be interested in
having a meeting to refine this map, but a meeting would only be worthwhile if there is true interest in pursuing this
option.
Thanks and I look forward to hearing from you.
Holly
MAP 1
TWP with Population I
VImm
0 SO 20
km
1:350,000
MAP 1
TWP with Population
mp20.3e �
' 1WP ]5-a6 P
PnF 01a .
� 1
Ua L
PUP ]1i pvP i29! sy 1WP ZI-Y6 s
PoRa.
3vP.
r P
1WP2s-1i � a � TWP 29-Ya � y_ a
i PoP YSEP fNm P}tl ��1WR Slab PUpo
:� „li R2.1 P°Pf • r ( - iPY PPPi +
T r
4
t
1
mPw
iwP n.lv 2 i
POR Iu � ^ Pe �E6 ;POP 6t � paRl15 1WP2T:£t .
V y'11 mPP2-fP !
r � Prq z
.L POP.I,
1 f
-
}�'� ^P p5 • 1 PPP iit 4 "PUA„i 33 TWR1Y.ta J�1119P z1-t>
iWPYI.IY
POje i ;a°+5 oR eS 3 T yAeP f]sz •'r ?NP]01!iWP20.33 �- - I�sTWPY0.92 RVP29.11
f Pfgrle'! ; rep 2.1- 3 POPPi POP.
Pop..
' TY1Pep1. T1pP ILf5 Y'Nrt iYn 1!1] �. l mP If.12 mP19.1ti
W ] ti..-__ PP eW jjPP i� t PaPf PaP.
s4 i
r r
P 91T TVmp(lii �1�3 -? lIMP1e�a 1WP el T., le-11 fzYP to-tl
y i S; T Poo 21, PORt Po 9
P
1VIP.iT-
t1lMe PaP\H
POP 126 iW>!ae TVPp ai-fe !Et-+YavPPSi,a £-
Ems ,i paP 319? I • �:1y-o2 t'PIR Pi-t r.
�` .. b
m ➢1.1!
* Im Py1p 111e! TWP Ie-il mP5&1! 1412 RYBfI
O ]a; 'POP 92 �'�-P 16] POP ZQ ��PRO
Pv T15 2P
Pap
Number Of People per R. Address
6 and less
7-17
■ Over 5O
Provincial Paved Road
Provincial Gravel Road
Paved Road
Gravel Road
TW P_Pop
Water Bodies
TWPIISfa'
'Pap 2!!
� SwP tF1F f I
Pop n' �, g' 119..Ut6
mPi6.12 mPYF11
at
TWP 145e P1z-13
Po`�I1�rmrw•
-
i
roa ex� � ^irrP'la-ix .'
PP e]t
u.n mPSe.,,
P
�,
11•fPi 3-tl T4YP�}1a
PPo o+�' PeP2
w r
0
10 26
s
kri2
1:360,000
Ariana Nielsen
From:
Layne Johnson
Sent:
December 2, 2020 12:38 PM
To:
Ariana Nielsen
Subject:
FW- Electoral Boundaries
Attachments:
Scan0006.pdf; Note to file - Harold Brauer Comments.docx
Additional submissions for Dec.10 agenda. The second attachment is one that summarizes a conversation I had with
Harold Brauer
Layne
From: Kevin Stephenson <stephensonk@newellmail.ca>
Sent: December 2, 202C 12:19 PM
To: La ne Johnson r'ohnsonl@newellmail.ca>
cc:
Subject: FW: Electoral Boundaries
Layne please see attached a recommendation from Janet Dovichakfor council consideration on 7 divisions and
suggested boundary alignments. Any questions, Janet's contact information is below.
Thanks, Kevin
From: Janet & Michael Dovichak
Sent: December 2, 2020 12:13 PM
To: Kevin Stephenson <stephensonk@newel lmail.ca?
Subject: Electoral Boundaries
Good Day Kevin,
I have reviewed the proposed suggested new divisions. Thanks for you help in navigating the site yesterday.
Div 1
Twp 17-17(i would leave with this group but could move to my 5),16,15; Twp 16-16, 15; Twp 15-16,15,14,13,12,11 &
Twp 14-16,15,14,13,12,11 1 realize this is a large grouping, however I think it best to try and keep some existing
boundaries in place.
Div 2
Rather than having the SW portion of the existing Div 2 moved keep in Div 2. Then Div 2 would include Twp 18-13, 12,
11; Twp 17+14,13, 12, 11 & Twp 16-14, 13, 12 11
Div 3
Twp 19-13, 12, 11; twp-14-11; twp 21-11; twp 22-12
div 4
twp 19-144 & twp 18-14
div 5
twp 19-18 - 15 & twp 18 - 15 maybe twp 17-17
div 6
twp 19-16,15; twp 2- 17, 15, 15; twp 2'-17, 16-15
div 7
all remaningTWR in the nw quadrant.
I sincerely wish that there was a better forum for review, as I have found this very time consuming.
My thoughts were to keep as many of the existing boundaries in place, keeping communities together. I kept in mind
that the area close to Brooks will most likely se the greatest growth in population, nest Div 2 which includes the Hamlet
of Tilley and the east side of Lake Newell. Another choice would be to use the major highways as some of the division
lines.
Hope that this makes sense!
Janet
MAP 1
TWP with Population
4 ID 20
km
