|
Post by John Blake on Aug 2, 2013 7:26:53 GMT -5
My thoughts on how the County should be reorganized are:
1. The council should be made up of one mayor and 10 councilors. 2. The county would be divided into six new wards each of approximately equal population. The actual ward boundaries could be reviewed and if necessary, altered every ten years to adjust for population changes. 3. One councilor would be elected to represent each ward. 4. Four councilors would be elected to represent the County as a whole. 5. The Mayor and each councilor would be limited to two consecutive terms of office.
|
|
|
Post by Loretta Salet on Aug 23, 2013 21:41:24 GMT -5
However the boundaries are decided, I believe that for someone to represent a ward, they must reside in it.
|
|
|
Post by Loretta S on Aug 23, 2013 22:30:12 GMT -5
My concerns are regarding revising how the representatives are elected when council size is determined. Anyone running to represent a ward in municipal elections, that person must live in that ward. (Think current Senate scandals: Duffy, Wallin etc)
My preference would be to retain the current wards, for historical significance and community identity. I think one person from each ward is sufficient. Yes, there will be population differences due to density, but as the past few years fighting IWTs in The County has shown, the councillor must not only represent the people, but be a representative of the land, its use and protection for future generations, in their ward.
.
|
|
|
Post by garymooney on Aug 24, 2013 8:25:02 GMT -5
Two points:
If there was only one representative per Historic Ward, there would be one Councillor for 584 electors in Bloomfield, and one Councillor for 6327 electors in Ameliasburgh. This 10 to 1 ratio would be an extreme violation of the rep. by pop. principle and would never survive a challenge to the OMB.
Currently, by a conscious decision of a past Council, it is not a requirement that a Councillor live in the Ward that he/she represents.
|
|