council workshop agenda for may 12, 2016...council workshop may 12, 2016 . ... april 28, 2016. this...

AGENDA

3:30 p.m. – 5:30 p.m.

Alderlea

Mayor Linda Jeffrey City and Regional Councillors

Peter Simmons, Acting Chief Administrative Officer Executive Leadership Team (ELT) and required staff

Light refreshments to be provided at the Workshop.

Workshop Agenda: Regional Governance Task Force

3:30 p.m. Welcome and Opening Remarks Mayor Linda Jeffrey

3:35 p.m. The Region of Peel Regional Governance Task Force Peter MacLeod, Regional Governance Task Force Facilitator

Principal, MASS LBP

5:20 p.m. Final Observations and Wrap-up Mayor Linda Jeffrey

Health breaks at appropriate times during the Workshop

Agenda materials will be distributed at the Workshop.

Attachments:

Peel Regional Governance Task Force- Presentation Slides

Correspondence from April 13, 2016 Brampton City Council meeting re. Regional Governance Resolutions

City Council Workshop Rules

Attire for the workshop is ‘business casual’ Section 20 of Procedure By-law 160-2004, as amended, applies:

A workshop can include open session and closed session business, in accordance with the Procedure By-law and The Municipal Act, 2001.

Workshop notice is to be made available to the public.

After Workshop notice is provided, no new matters can be added to an agenda.

Quorum of Council is not required for a Workshop.

Members of the public attending a Workshop are permitted to observe the public session.

No decisions or directions to staff can be made at the Workshop. Any matter requiring a Council decision must be reported back to Committee or Council for consideration and approval.

The City Clerk’s Office will prepare “minutes” from the Workshop. Public session “minutes” are available for public review if a request is received.

Council Workshop

May 12, 2016

Peel Regional Governance Task Force Preparatory Meeting

April 28, 2016

This document was created to support the deliberations of the Peel Regional Governance Task Force. The information and options it contains are included for the purpose of informing discussion amongst its members.

All data come from best available sources including Statistics Canada, Peel Regional Council approved forecasts, and Amendment 2 to the Growth Plan .

1. Review findings from the interviews 2. Review practices in peer regions 3. Review population projections and implications 4. Review area, households and eligible voters 5. Review voting trends 6. Review of ward size 7. Review fiscal history 8. Selecting a chair — Options 9. Council size and composition — Options 10. Preparing for the working session

Today’s Agenda

PEEL REGIONAL GOVERNANCE TASK FORCE

3

Facilitate meetings with the Region’s Task Force … to perform a review of the governance of the Region of Peel including options for the selection of the Regional Chair; and the composition of Regional Council… Assist with the development of options and recommendations for a report back to Regional Council in [June] 2016.

Task Force Objective and Our Role


The Guiding Principles for the meetings shall be:

• Foster a neutral environment for principled, interest based facilitation • Encourage a collaborative environment; • Ensure the communication and dialogue is respectful; • Ensure that the environment for exploration of interest and ideas is neutral and comfortable; • The Facilitators shall not divulge any confidential information disclosed [during the process unless otherwise agreed by all parties] • There shall be no audio or visual record of any meeting; • Each meeting must have a clearly articulated and agreed upon purpose at the outset; • The Facilitators shall take direction from the members of the Task Force only and is at the service of the Task Force as a whole.

4

This is a learning process — it requires curiosity and empathy

There are no perfect or easy answers — we build from common ground

We don’t decide until we decide — we need space to consider alternatives

Governance is a long game — we need good, collegial relationships with one another

Task Force Objective and Our Role


5

Proposed Process


Orientation Meeting March 31; 2pm-4pm

Regional Council Interviews

April 7, 14, 21

Preparatory Meeting: April 28; 3:30pm-5:30pm

Presentation and discussion of findings; Discussion of council

composition and chair scenarios

Working Meeting 2:May 27; 9am-2pm

Review and discuss council and chair scenarios; Identify preferred

scenarios

Concluding Meeting:June 9; 2pm-4pm

Discuss outstanding issues; Approve preferred scenario for discussion by regional council

Final Report

6

1. Findings from the interviews

7

1. Broad dissatisfaction with the recent election by council; the process was hurried, confusing, lacked transparency, awkward — especially for new members

2. Frustration with additional cost and timing of by-election

3. Broad support for continuing to elect the chair by council citing administrative and peace-making role; concern about formal political mandate and cost to campaign

4. Small minority prefer direct election citing formal political mandate to compel compromise, strengthen democratic accountability, and better represent the region to senior orders of government

5. Strong belief that changes to the existing process are necessary and could remedy some concerns

Findings from the interviews: Selecting a chair


8

1. We spoke with 23 of 24 Regional Councillors and municipal CAOs; interviews lasted on average 35 minutes

2. Broad support for regional government — “it plays a constructive and essential role”; a small minority believes the region is unnecessary — “we’ve outgrown the model” and would prefer to dissolve the region in favour of single-tier Mississauga and Brampton municipal governments, or to form an amalgamated City of Peel

3. Most members favour a Council at or around its current size; most members rejected a significantly enlarged Council; a few proposed a significantly reduced council

4. Members strongly support representation by population, fairness and efficacy as critical factors in determining council size and composition; Caledon councillors cite history, territory and work load; many councillors also express concern about variations in ward size

Findings from the interviews: Council


9

5. Caledon members feel well-represented by regional council;

6. Brampton members believe they are under-represented and believe they are ill-served by the hybrid model of area and regional councillors;

7. A majority of Mississauga members affirm the importance of rep-by-pop and wish to retain their 50% vote share on council; members accept that Brampton is under-represented; many express strong concern regarding a perceived fiscal imbalance; modest support for seceding from the region

8. Strong support for reducing Caledon’s delegation; modest support for discontinuing Caledon’s membership in the region

9. Strong support for providing additional seats to Brampton;

10. Modest support for increasing the size of Mississauga’s delegation to preserve 50% vote share



10

11. Strong support for merging local and regional Brampton seats; cited as a source of local dysfunction; Support for local council reform in Caledon

12. Extremely varied assumptions on population trends, fiscal contributions and benefits, and voting history

13. A significant generational divide; Concerns regarding diversity of council members and length of tenure

14. Strong desire from a majority of members to settle the issue; perception that it is driven by political agendas at the expense of more important business



11

2. Practices in peer jurisdictions

12

Peer jurisdictions


REGION POPULATION (2011) COUNCIL SIZEinc. Chair

POP per SEATinc. Chair Municipalities CHAIR METHOD COMMENTS

Halton 501,669 21 23,889 4 Direct Election Since 2000

Durham 608,124 29 20,970 8 Direct Election Since 2014; Regional Council composition review completed and submitted to the Minister

York 1,033,000 21 49,190 9 Elected by Regional Council

Motion to elect chair lost in February. Adopted recommendations to take a broader look at governance

Waterloo 507,096 17 29,829 7 Direct ElectionSince 1996

Comprised of Chair, 7 municipal mayors and 8 directly elected Regional Councillors

Niagara 431,346 31 13,914 12 Elected by Regional Council from Council

May only elect by secret ballot a Chair from membership of Council;

12 mayors + 18 regional councillors

Peel 1,297,000 25 51,880 3 Elected by Regional Council Secret ballot abolished in 2013

13

3. Population projections and implicationsThe data are based on year-end populations that include census undercount and are intercensal estimates based on

census base year and CMHC housing absorptions and demolitions.

ROPA 24 population forecasts are the current Council approved forecasts in conformity with the Province’s Growth Plan.

Amendment 2 to the Province’s Growth Plan includes updated forecasts for 2031 and 2041. Municipal numbers are projections are extrapolated from preceding growth rates and have not been approved.

They are for illustrative purposes only.

14

Peel Population: 1974-2014


0

400,000

800,000

1,200,000

1,600,000

1974 1984 1994 2004 2014

20,582 29,360 39,150 56,842 66,40091,842

178,343

262,980

407,380

594,600

222,329

361,754

528,555

673,814

757,200

334,753

569,457

830,686

1,138,036

1,418,200

PeelMississaugaBramptonCaledon

15

Peel Population: 2005-2041


0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2005 2011 Census 2015 2021 2031 2031v2 2041v3

60,523 62,000 68,500 87,000 108,000 113,000 146,000

443,364

545,500611,000 635,000

727,000

833,000919,000

712,518 742,500 763,500 768,000 805,000 824,000905,000

1,216,405

1,350,0001,443,000

1,490,000

1,640,000

1,770,000

1,970,000


16

Peel Population Share: 2005-2041


0

25

50

75

100

2005 2011 Census 2015 2021 2031 2031v2 2041v2

7676555

47474443424036

464749

515355

59

MississaugaBramptonCaledon

17

2011 & 2015 Seat Projections: Current, 24 and 60k


2011 (Census) % of Peel Seats Vote Share Pop per Seat Voter Value Seats:24 Seats:60k

Peel 1,350,000 100% 24 100% 56,250 1.00 24 22

Mississauga 742,500 55% 12 50% 61,875 0.91 13 12

Brampton 545,000 40% 7 29% 87,270 0.64 10 9

Caledon 62,000 5% 5 20% 13,666 4.12 1 1

Vote Share indicates the percentage of seats awarded to a municipal delegation Population per Seat indicates the population per municipal delegate Voter Value indicates the relative value of a municipal resident as represented by their municipal delegate and is calculated by dividing the municipal population per seat by the regional population per seat

18

2015 (Current Estimate)

% of Peel Seats Vote Share Pop per Seat Voter Value Seats:24 Seats:60k

Peel 1,443,000 100% 24 100% 60,125 1.00 24 24

Mississauga 763,500 53% 12 50% 63,583 0.95 13 13

Brampton 611,000 42% 7 29% 87,285 0.69 10 10

Caledon 68,500 5% 5 20% 13,700 4.39 1 1

Seats: 24 allocates seats by population, maintaining the current size of regional council

Seats: 60k allocates seats based on one councillor per 60,000 residents, increasing the size of council as necessary

2021 & 2031 Seat Projections: Static, 24 and 60k


2021 % of Peel Seats:Static PpSeat Voter Value Seats:24 Seats:60k

Peel 1,490,000 100% 24 62,083 1.00 24 25

Mississauga 768,000 52% 12 64,000 0.97 13 13

Brampton 635,000 43% 7 90,714 0.68 10 11

Caledon 87,000 6% 5 17,400 3.57 1 2

2031 % of Peel Seats:Static PpSeat Voter Value Seats:24 Seats:60k

Peel 1,640,000 100% 24 68,233 1.00 24 27

Mississauga 805,000 49% 12 67,083 1.02 12 13

Brampton 727,000 44% 7 103,857 0.66 11 12

Caledon 108,000 7% 5 21,600 3.16 1 2

Static indicates the effect of the current distribution on Pop per Seat



19

2031v2 & 2041 v2 Seat Projections: Static, 24 and 60k


2031v2 % of Peel Seats:Static PpSeat Voter Value Seats:24 Seats:60k

Peel 1,770,000 100% 24 73,750 1.00 24 29

Mississauga 824,000 47% 12 69,358 1.06 12 14

Brampton 833,000 45% 7 114,628 0.64 11 13

Caledon 113,000 8% 5 27,060 2.73 1 2

2041v2 % of Peel Seats:Static PpSeat Voter Value Seats:24 Seats:60k

Peel 1,970,000 100% 24 82,083 1.00 24 32

Mississauga 905,000 44% 12 109,287 0.75 11 15

Brampton 919,000 47% 7 130,628 0.63 12 15

Caledon 146,000 9% 5 23,460 3.50 1 2

20

Static indicates the effect of the current distribution on Pop per Seat



4. Area, Households & Eligible Voters


21

Area and Population


Area (km2) % of Peel Seats Km2 per seat* 2015 Pop Pop Density

Peel 1,246 100% 24 39 1,490,000 1,1195

Mississauga 292 23% 12 24 768,000 2630

Brampton 266 21% 7 38 635,000 2387

Caledon 688 55% 5 138 87,000 126

22

Households2011 Pop 2011 Households 2015 Pop 2015 Estimate

Peel 1,350,000 403,000 1,443,000 429,000

Mississauga 742,500 235,000 763,500 242,000

Brampton 545,000 149,000 611,000 166,500

Caledon 62,000 19,000 68,500 21,000

Eligible Voters2011 Pop Pop % of Peel 2014 Eligible Voters EV % of Peel

Peel 1,350,000 100% 782,146 100%

Mississauga 742,500 55% 444,755 57%

Brampton 545,000 40% 289,906 37%

Caledon 62,000 5% 47,485 6%

5. Voting trends (2011-2016)


23


1 2

Mississauga 0 4

Brampton 0 4

Caledon 0 0

Recorded Votes — Opposed

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Mississauga 4 0 0 8 1 8 0 0 10 0 0 9

Brampton 2 4 0 1 2 2 0 3 2 4 0 3

Caledon 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 5 0 0

13 14 15 16 17 18

Mississauga 0 3 0 0 2 0

Brampton 0 2 0 4 2 0

Caledon 0 0 0 5 0 0

2016

2015

24


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mississauga 0 0 0 0 0 10 0

Brampton 0 0 0 0 2 5 0

Caledon 0 0 0 0 0 5 0


1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mississauga 1 0 0 1 0 0 0

Brampton 2 0 0 1 0 0 0

Caledon 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

2014

2013

25


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Mississauga 0 3 0 0 0 4 5 6 0 11 0 4

Brampton 0 3 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 3 0 1

Caledon 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 3 0 0


13 14 15

Mississauga 4 4 5

Brampton 2 4 2

Caledon 1 0 0

2012

1 2 3 4 5

Mississauga 0 5 0 0 0

Brampton 0 4 1 3 0

Caledon 0 4 0 3 0

2011

26

6. Ward Size


27


Brampton Spread

2021 16,3032031 84,850

Caledon Spread

2021 20,6342031 28,323

Mississauga Spread

2021 33,0612031 55,784

28

7. Fiscal history


29


30

0

20

40

60

80

1974 1984 1994 2005 2011 Census 2015 2021 2031v2 2041v3

4 4 4 5 5 5

2426 26

3133 34

71 70 70

6462 61

MississaugaBramptonCaledon

Regional Tax Levy Apportionment (1974-2015)

8. Selecting a chair — Options


31


Election by Council AStatus Quo

Election by Council BFormal, public interview process

and secret ballot

Election by Council C Council members only, formal,

public interviews and secret ballot

Direct Election

32

9. Size and composition of Council — Options


33

Adams’ Recommendations

PEEL REGIONAL GOVERNANCE TASK FORCEPEEL REGIONAL GOVERNANCE TASK FORCE

Population per seat since founding

2004 Adams 2005Peel 21 28 24Mississauga 10 12 12Brampton 6 11 7Caledon 5 5 5

0

22,500

45,000

67,500

90,000

1974 1984 1994 2004 2014

4,116 5,872 7,830 11,368 13,28015,307

29,723

43,830

67,896

85,371

22,232

36,175

52,855

67,38163,100

15,950

27,117

39,556

54,19259,091


34

1. There is little appetite for the Waterloo model of directly elected regional councillors

2. There is little appetite to introduce a system of weighted voting

3. There is a strong appreciation for the difficulties presented by the mixed model of area and regional representation and a desire to reduce reliance on this model in Brampton and Caledon

4. There is a strong desire to avoid significantly increasing the size of council; any additions would be minimal

5. There is a strong desire to avoid the need to reset council size and composition with each election

6. There is recognition that growth requires change; any agreement should have a formula for future growth or review

7. Mississauga members broadly wish to maintain its 50% vote share while not increasing the size of their delegation

8. Brampton members broadly wish to bring their full delegation to regional council

9. Caledon members broadly wish to retain their five member delegation


Observations and interests

35


2011 % of Peel 2015 (Current Estimate)

% of Peel 2021 % of Peel 1. Stat quo 2. B4 (C) 3. M% B4 (C)

4. B2 (C) 5. M% B2 (C)

Peel 1,350,000 100% 1,443,000 100% 1,490,000 100% 24 28 32 26 30

Mississauga 742,500 55% 763,500 53% 768,000 52% 12 12 16 12 16

Brampton 545,000 40% 611,000 42% 635,000 43% 7 11 11 9 9

Caledon 62,000 5% 68,500 5% 87,000 6% 5 5 5 5 5

10 Options (2011, 2015 & 2021 Overview)

2011 % of Peel 2015 (Current Estimate)

% of Peel 2021 % of Peel 6. B4 (C-2) 7. M% B4 (C-2)

8. (M%) B2 (C-2)

9. Pure Pop 24 /

10. Pure Pop 28 /

Peel 1,350,000 100% 1,443,000 100% 1,490,000 100% 26 28 24 24 28

Mississauga 742,500 55% 763,500 53% 768,000 52% 12 14 12 13 14

Brampton 545,000 40% 611,000 42% 635,000 43% 11 11 9 10 12

Caledon 62,000 5% 68,500 5% 87,000 6% 3 3 3 1 2

36


1. Stat quo 2011 % of Peel Vote

SharePop / Seat

Voter Value 2015 % of Peel Vote

SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat

Voter Value 2031v2 % of Peel Vote

SharePop per

SeatVoter Value

Peel 24 1,350,000 100% 100% 56,250 1.00 1,443,000 100% 100% 60,125 1.00 1,490,000 100% 100% 62,083 1.00 1,770,000 100% 100% 73,750 1.00

Mississauga 12 742,500 55% 50% 61,875 0.91 763,500 53% 50% 63,625 0.94 768,000 52% 50% 64,000 0.97 832,300 47% 50% 69,358 1.06

Brampton 7 545,000 40% 29% 77,857 0.72 611,000 42% 29% 87,286 0.69 635,000 43% 29% 90,714 0.68 802,400 45% 29% 114,628 0.64

Caledon 5 62,000 5% 21% 12,400 4.54 68,500 5% 21% 13,700 4.39 87,000 6% 21% 17,400 3.57 135,300 8% 21% 27,600 2.67

Options 1-2 (2011, 2015, 2021 & 2031v2)

2. B4 (C) 2011 % of Peel Vote

SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat

Voter Value

Peel 28 1,350,000 100% 100% 48,214 1.00 1,443,000 100% 100% 51,536 1.00 1,490,000 100% 100% 62,083 1.00 1,770,000 100% 100% 73,750 1.00

Mississauga 12 742,500 55% 43% 61,875 0.78 763,500 53% 43% 63,625 0.81 768,000 52% 43% 64,000 0.97 832,300 47% 43% 69,358 1.06

Brampton 11 545,000 40% 39% 49,545 0.97 611,000 42% 39% 55,545 0.93 635,000 43% 39% 57,727 1.08 802,400 45% 39% 72,945 1.01

Caledon 5 62,000 5% 18% 12,400 3.89 68,500 5% 18% 13,700 3.76 87,000 6% 18% 17,400 3.57 135,300 8% 18% 27,060 2.73

37


3. M% B4 (C) 2011 % of Peel Vote

SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat

Voter Value

Peel 32 1,350,000 100% 100% 42,188 1.00 1,443,000 100% 100% 45,094 1.00 1,490,000 100% 100% 62,083 1.00 1,770,000 100% 100% 73,750 1.00

Mississauga 16 742,500 55% 50% 46,406 0.91 763,500 53% 50% 47,719 0.94 768,000 52% 50% 48,000 1.29 832,300 47% 50% 52,018 1.42

Brampton 11 545,000 40% 34% 49,545 0.85 611,000 42% 34% 55,545 0.81 635,000 43% 34% 57,727 1.08 802,400 45% 34% 72,945 1.01

Caledon 5 62,000 5% 16% 12,400 3.40 68,500 5% 16% 13,700 3.29 87,000 6% 16% 17,400 3.57 135,300 8% 16% 27,060 2.73

Options 3-4 (2011, 2015, 2021 & 2031v2)

4. B2 (C) 2011 % of Peel Vote

SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat

Voter Value

Peel 26 1,350,000 100% 100% 51,923 1.00 1,443,000 100% 100% 55,500 1.00 1,490,000 100% 100% 62,083 1.00 1,770,000 100% 100% 73,750 1.00

Mississauga 12 742,500 55% 46% 61,875 0.84 763,500 53% 46% 63,625 0.87 768,000 52% 46% 64,000 0.97 832,300 47% 46% 69,358 1.06

Brampton 9 545,000 40% 35% 60,556 0.86 611,000 42% 35% 67,889 0.82 635,000 43% 35% 70,555 0.88 802,400 45% 35% 89,155 0.83

Caledon 5 62,000 5% 19% 12,400 4.19 68,500 5% 19% 13,700 4.05 87,000 6% 19% 17,400 3.57 135,300 8% 19% 27,060 2.73

38


5. M% B2 (C) 2011 % of Peel Vote

SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop per

SeatVoter Value 2031v2 % of Peel Vote

SharePop per

SeatVoter Value

Peel 30 1,350,000 100% 100% 45,000 1.00 1,443,000 100% 100% 48,100 1.00 1,490,000 100% 100% 62,083 1.00 1,770,000 100% 100% 73,750 1.00

Mississauga 16 742,500 55% 53% 46,406 0.97 763,500 53% 53% 47,719 1.01 768,000 52% 53% 48,000 1.29 832,300 47% 53% 52,018 1.42

Brampton 9 545,000 40% 30% 60,556 0.74 611,000 42% 30% 67,889 0.71 635,000 43% 30% 70,555 0.88 802,400 45% 30% 89,155 0.83

Caledon 5 62,000 5% 17% 12,400 3.63 68,500 5% 17% 13,700 3.51 87,000 6% 17% 17,400 3.57 135,300 8% 17% 27,060 2.73

Options 5-6 (2011, 2015, 2021 & 2031v2)

6. B4 (C-2) 2011 % of Peel Vote

SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop per


SharePop per

SeatVoter Value

Peel 26 1,350,000 100% 100% 51,923 1.00 1,443,000 100% 100% 55,500 1.00 1,490,000 100% 100% 62,083 1.00 1,770,000 100% 100% 73,750 1.00

Mississauga 12 742,500 55% 46% 61,875 0.84 763,500 53% 46% 63,625 0.87 768,000 52% 46% 64,000 0.97 832,300 47% 46% 68,608 1.07

Brampton 11 545,000 40% 42% 49,545 1.05 611,000 42% 42% 55,545 1.00 635,000 43% 42% 57,727 1.08 802,400 45% 42% 72,945 1.01

Caledon 3 62,000 5% 11% 20,667 2.51 68,500 5% 11% 22,833 2.43 87,000 6% 11% 29,000 2.14 135,300 8% 11% 45,100 1.64

39


7. M% B4 (C-2) 2011 % of Peel Vote

SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop per


SharePop per

SeatVoter Value

Peel 28 1,350,000 100% 100% 48,214 1.00 1,443,000 100% 100% 51,536 1.00 1,490,000 100% 100% 62,083 1.00 1,770,000 100% 100% 73,750 1.00

Mississauga 14 742,500 55% 50% 53,036 0.91 763,500 53% 50% 54,536 0.94 768,000 52% 50% 54,857 1.13 832,300 47% 50% 59,450 1.24

Brampton 11 545,000 40% 39% 49,545 0.97 611,000 42% 39% 55,545 0.93 635,000 43% 39% 57,727 1.08 802,400 45% 39% 72,945 1.01

Caledon 3 62,000 5% 11% 20,667 2.33 68,500 5% 11% 22,833 2.26 87,000 6% 11% 29,000 2.14 135,300 8% 11% 45,100 1.64

Options 7-8 (2011, 2015, 2021 & 2031v2)

8. B2 (C-2) 2011 % of Peel Vote

SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop per


SharePop per

SeatVoter Value

Peel 24 1,350,000 100% 100% 56,250 1.00 1,443,000 100% 100% 60,125 1.00 1,490,000 100% 100% 62,083 1.00 1,770,000 100% 100% 73,750 1.00

Mississauga 12 742,500 55% 50% 61,875 0.91 763,500 53% 50% 63,625 0.94 768,000 52% 50% 64,000 0.97 832,300 47% 50% 69,358 1.06

Brampton 9 545,000 40% 38% 60,556 0.93 611,000 42% 38% 67,889 0.89 635,000 43% 38% 70,555 0.88 802,400 45% 38% 89,155 0.83

Caledon 3 62,000 5% 12% 20,667 2.72 68,500 5% 12% 22,833 2.63 87,000 6% 12% 29,000 2.14 135,300 8% 12% 45,100 1.64

40


Options 9 & 10 (2011, 2015, 2021 & 2031v2)

9. Pure Pop 24 2011 % of Peel Vote

SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop per


SharePop per

SeatVoter Value

Peel 24 1,350,000 100% 100% 56,250 1.00 1,443,000 100% 100% 60,125 1.00 1,490,000 100% 100% 62,083 1.00 1,770,000 100% 100% 73,750 1.00

Mississauga 13 742,500 55% 54% 57,115 0.98 763,500 53% 54% 58,731 1.02 768,000 52% 54% 59,076 1.05 832,300 47% 54% 64,023 1.15

Brampton 10 545,000 40% 42% 54,500 1.03 611,000 42% 42% 61,100 0.98 635,000 43% 42% 63,500 0.98 802,400 45% 42% 80,240 0.92

Caledon 1 62,000 5% 4% 62,000 0.91 68,500 5% 4% 68,500 0.88 87,000 6% 4% 87,000 0.71 135,300 8% 4% 135,300 0.55

10. PurePop

282011 % of Peel Vote

SharePop / Seat


SharePop / Seat


SharePop per


SharePop per

SeatVoter Value

Peel 28 1,350,000 100% 100% 48,214 1.00 1,443,000 100% 100% 51,536 1.00 1,490,000 100% 100% 62,083 1.00 1,770,000 100% 100% 63,214 1.00

Mississauga 14 742,500 55% 50% 53,036 0.91 763,500 53% 50% 54,536 0.94 768,000 52% 50% 54,857 1.13 832,300 47% 50% 58,540 1.08

Brampton 12 545,000 40% 43% 45,417 1.06 611,000 42% 43% 50,917 1.01 635,000 43% 43% 52,916 1.17 802,400 45% 43% 66,866 0.95

Caledon 2 62,000 5% 7% 31,000 1.56 68,500 5% 7% 34,250 1.50 87,000 6% 7% 43,500 1.43 135,300 8% 7% 67,650 0.93

41

10. Preparing for the working session

42

Please contact the facilitator to indicate your preferred principles, options and opportunities for agreement by May 20, 2016

These discussions will be the basis for an extended facilitation session on May 27, 9am - 3pm

43

At this time, the task force will work to reach agreement on a series of issues including:

• The preferred principles and factors for selecting a regional chair

• One or more recommendations for deliberation by regional council concerning the preferred method for selecting a regional chair

• The preferred principles and factors for deciding the size and composition of council

• The preferred population series for allocating seats (Prior census, approved growth, or a mix)

• A preferred time span for periodic review of council size and composition (Annually, after each regional election, after two regional elections, following each decennial census)

• One or more recommendations for deliberation by regional council concerning the size and composition of council

council workshop agenda for may 12, 2016...council workshop may 12, 2016 . ... april 28, 2016. this...

Documents