ELECTORAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW Mount Alexander Shire Council Preliminary Report
March 2011
2
Preliminary Report
Contents
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 4 BACKGROUND 5 Legislative basis 5 The VEC and Electoral Representation Reviews 5 Profile of Mount Alexander Shire 5 Current electoral structure 6 The Electoral Representation Review process 6 VEC research 7 THE VEC’S APPROACH 8 Number of councillors 8 Electoral structure 8 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 10 Public information 10 Advertising 10 Media release 10 Public information session 10 Information brochure and poster 10 Helpline 10 VEC website 11 Guide for Submissions 11 Preliminary Submissions 11 Analysis of Submissions 11 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 Number of councillors 13 Electoral structure 15 Current structure 15 Ward boundaries 16 3 Ward names 17 Unsubdivided municipality 17 Recommendation — Option A (Preferred Option) 17 Recommendation — Option B (Alternative Option) 17 NEXT STEPS 18 Where should I send my submission? 18 Public access to submissions 18 Public access to reports 19 APPENDIX ONE: LIST OF PRELIMINARY SUBMITTERS 20 APPENDIX TWO: OPTIONS MAPS 21
Summary of Recommendations
The Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) recommends:
Option A (Preferred Option) That the Mount Alexander Shire Council consist of seven councillors, to be elected from one three-councillor ward and four single-councillor wards, with unchanged ward boundaries.
Option B (Alternative Option)
That the Mount Alexander Shire Council consist of seven councillors, to be elected from an unsubdivided municipality.
4
Preliminary Report
Background
Legislative basis
The Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) requires the VEC to conduct an Electoral Representation Review of each municipality in Victoria at least every 12 years. The Act specifies that the purpose of a representation review is to recommend the number of councillors and the electoral structure that provides ‘fair and equitable representation for the persons who are entitled to vote at a general election of the Council’.1
The Act requires the VEC as part of an Electoral Representation Review to consider:
the number of councillors in a municipality; whether a municipality should be unsubdivided or subdivided; if it should be subdivided, whether ward boundaries:
o provide for fair and equitable division of the municipality; o ensure equality of representation through the number of voters being represented by each councillor being within 10% of the average number of voters represented by all councillors; and,
if it should be subdivided, the number of councillors that should be elected for each ward.
The VEC and Electoral Representation Reviews
The VEC has conducted Electoral Representation Reviews since 2004 at the request of local councils. In recognition of the VEC’s independence and impartiality, the Act was changed in 2010 to define the VEC as the only agency authorised to undertake the reviews.
The VEC draws on its experience in mapping and boundary modelling and also engages 5
consultants with experience in local government to provide advice on specific local representation issues during the review.
Profile of Mount Alexander Shire
Mount Alexander Shire was formed in 1995 by the amalgamation of the City of Castlemaine, the Shire of Newstead and parts of the Shires of Maldon and Metcalfe.
At the 2006 census, the Shire recorded a population of 17,067 people. According to the Department of Planning and Community Development’s Victoria in Future projections, the population of Mount Alexander Shire will grow by 13.56% by 2020. This growth will be fairly even across the Shire.
1 Section 219D of the Local Government Act 1989.
Current electoral structure
The last Electoral Representation Review for Mount Alexander Shire Council took place in 2004–2005. Following the review, the Minister for Local Government determined that the structure of Mount Alexander Shire Council would be:
seven councillors; divided into five wards — Calder Ward, Castlemaine Ward, Coliban Ward, Loddon Ward and Tarrengower Ward; with three councillors from the Castlemaine Ward and one councillor from each of the remaining wards.
Previously, the Shire comprised seven single-councillor wards, with the urban area of Castlemaine divided into three wards. The VEC recommended creating a three- councillor Castlemaine Ward to represent that community, while retaining single- councillor wards for the local communities outside Castlemaine.
The Electoral Representation Review process
To achieve the purpose of the Electoral Representation Review, the VEC proceeds on the basis of three main principles:
1. To ensure the number of voters represented by each councillor is within 10 % of the average number of voters per councillor for that municipality.
Populations are continually changing — they grow in some areas and decline in others. Over time these changes can lead to some wards having larger or smaller numbers of voters. As part of the Electoral Representation Review, the VEC needs to correct any imbalances. The VEC also tries to ensure the boundaries it sets will 6 continue to provide equitable representation until the next review by taking
account of likely population changes.
2. To take a consistent, State-wide approach to the total number of councillors.
The VEC is guided by its comparisons with municipalities of a similar size and category to the council under review. The VEC also considers any special circumstances that warrant the municipality having more or fewer councillors than similar municipalities.
3. To ensure communities of interest are as fairly represented as possible.
Each municipality contains a number of communities of interest and, where practicable, the electoral structure should be designed to take these into account. This is important for assisting the elected councillors to be effective representatives of the people in their particular municipality or ward.
Preliminary Report
The VEC bases its recommendations on:
internal research specifically relating to the municipality under review; VEC experience from its work with other municipalities and in similar reviews for State elections; VEC expertise in mapping, demography and local government; and, careful consideration of all input from the public in written and verbal submissions received during the review.
Public submissions are an important part of the process, but are not the only consideration during a Review. The VEC’s recommendations are formed through careful consideration of all submissions and analysis of other factors, such as the need to give representation to communities of interest.
VEC research
In addition to the information provided by submitters, the VEC creates a profile of the municipality based on population trends and demographic indicators. The VEC uses the Australian Bureau of Statistics 2006 census community profiles, the Victoria in Future population projections and voter statistics from the Victorian electoral roll. The VEC also undertakes field work, viewing current and possible boundaries for each of the options to evaluate their effectiveness.
7
The VEC’s approach
The Act requires the VEC to consider two matters as part of an Electoral Representation Review:
the number of councillors for the municipality; and, the electoral structure of the municipality.
The VEC approaches each of these matters in a consistent way.
Number of councillors
The Act allows for a municipality to have between five and 12 councillors2, but does not specify how to decide the appropriate number. However, in considering the number of councillors for a municipality, the VEC is guided by the Victorian Parliament’s intention for fairness and equity in the local representation of voters under the Act.
The VEC considers that there are three major factors that should be considered:
the diversity of the population; councillors’ workloads; and the desirability of preventing tied votes.
The VEC considers that municipalities with large populations are more likely to be diverse both in the nature of their communities and the issues of representation. Geographic factors, particularly in rural municipalities, can also affect diversity.
In addition, councillors’ workloads may be affected by the nature and complexity of services provided by the Council, geographic size and topography, population growth or decline and social diversity including social disadvantage and cultural mix.
8 To reduce the risk of tied votes, the VEC generally recommends an uneven number of
councillors.
Electoral structure
The Act allows for a municipality:
to be unsubdivided — with all councillors elected ‘at large’ by all voters; or, to be subdivided into a number of wards.
If the municipality is subdivided into wards, there are a further three options available:
single-councillor wards; multi-councillor wards; and, a combination of single-councillor and multi-councillor wards.
2 Section 5B(1) of the Local Government Act 1989.
Preliminary Report
A subdivided municipality must have internal boundaries that provide for a fair and equitable division of the municipality and the wards must ensure equality of representation through the number of voters represented by each councillor being within 10% of the average number of voters per councillor for the municipality.
In considering the electoral structure of a municipality, the VEC considers the following matters:
communities of interest where people share a range of common concerns, such as a common geographic, economic or cultural link; and, the longevity of the structure, aiming to keep voter numbers within the 10% tolerance as long as possible; geographic factors, such as size and topography; the number of voters in potential wards (for example, a very large ward might have a plethora of candidates, leading to unwieldy ballot papers); the easy identification of ward boundaries; models of representation; and other factors such as the working of proportional representation.
9
Public involvement
Public information
The public information program included:
public notices printed in local and State-wide papers; a public information session to outline the review process and respond to questions from the community; a media release announcing the commencement of the review; coverage through the municipality’s media, e.g. the council’s website or newsletter; a helpline and dedicated email address to answer public enquiries; ongoing information updates and availability of submissions on the VEC website; and a Guide for Submissions to highlight the process and provide background information on the scope of the review.
Advertising
In accordance with section 219F(4) of the Act, the VEC ensured public notices were placed in local newspapers — the Castlemaine Mail and the Maldon Tarrangower Times on 4 February 2011 and the Kyneton Midland Express on 8 February 2011. The notice detailed the process for the review and called for public submissions. A general notice covering several reviews was printed in The Age and the Herald Sun on Tuesday, 1 February.
Media release 10 A media release was distributed by the council to local media. Public information session
The VEC held a public information session on Wednesday, 23 February 2011 at the Castlemaine Phee Broadway Theatre, Mechanics Lane, Castlemaine, for people interested in the review process.
Information brochure and poster
An information brochure was provided to the council to be distributed to residents through the council network, such as in libraries and service centres. A poster was provided to the council to be displayed in public spaces.
Helpline
A helpline was established to assist with public enquiries concerning the review process.
Preliminary Report
VEC website
The VEC website delivered up to date information and provided transparency during the review process. All preliminary submissions were posted on the website. An online submission tool was created to facilitate the submission process.
Guide for Submissions
A Guide for Submissions was developed and distributed to those interested in making submissions. Copies of the Guide for Submissions were available electronically on the VEC website, in hardcopy on request and were provided to the council.
Preliminary Submissions
The VEC received four preliminary submissions. The deadline for submissions was 5.00pm on Tuesday, 8 March 2011.
Submitter wanted Submitter did not Submitter wanted the number of Submitter wanted comment on the fewer wards wards to remain more wards number of wards unchanged
Submitter wanted — — — — fewer councillors
Submitter wanted the number of 2 1 1 — councillors to remain unchanged
Submitter wanted — — — — more councillors
Submitter did not comment on the — — — — number of 11 councillors
Analysis of Submissions
The only common element among the four submissions is that all preferred to retain the current number of councillors (though the Proportional Representation Society suggested an alternative of nine councillors). Most submissions took the number of councillors for granted, but the Council argued that the current number is appropriate because the ratio of voters to councillor is comparable to similar-sized municipalities, the current number adequately represents voters’ needs, and the odd number of councillors prevents tied votes.
There was more diversity on the electoral structure, with two submissions advocating an unsubdivided council, one wanting single-councillor wards, and one supporting the
status quo. The Proportional Representation Society argued in terms of the principles of proportional representation, maintaining that the current structure means that there are unequal quotas for election and that more votes are wasted in single-councillor wards. Mr Roberts believed that the three councillors for Castlemaine Ward gave this ward an advantage over the others, and that councillors are elected to represent the whole of the Shire and so all voters should vote for all councillors. Castlemaine Action Inc. wanted single-councillor wards on the ground that proportional representation had been abused by candidates fielding multiple ‘running mates’. The Council supported the current structure because it reflected geographic communities of interest and enabled smaller communities to take up concerns with their ward councillor.
Only the Council submission mentioned ward boundaries. The Council considered that there was no need to change ward boundaries, as enrolments for all wards were within the 10% tolerance and they were not likely to go out of balance in the next 12 years.
A list of submitters, by name, is available in Appendix One. Copies of the submissions can be viewed on the VEC website at vec.vic.gov.au.
12
Preliminary Report
Findings and Recommendations
Number of councillors
The VEC considers that similar types of municipalities of a similar size should have the same number of councillors, unless special circumstances justify a variation. The following table shows where Mount Alexander Shire fits among rural municipalities. The municipalities are ranked by number of voters.
Municipality Current estimate of Number of Number of voters voters councillors per councillor
Wellington 42,531 9 4,726
Bass Coast 39,780 7 5,683
East Gippsland 38,805 9 4,312
Baw Baw 33,211 9 3,690
Macedon Ranges 32,993 9 3,666
Surf Coast 29,171 9 3,241
Campaspe 28,431 9 3,159
South Gippsland 27,567 9 3,063
Mitchell 25,729 9 2,859
Moira 22,877 9 2,542
Moorabool 21,833 7 3,119
Colac Otway 19,508 7 2,787 13
Glenelg 16,620 7 2,374
Golden Plains 15,612 7 2,230
Mount Alexander 15,402 7 2,200
Hepburn 14,213 7 2,030
Murrindindi 13,936 7 1,991
Moyne 13,875 7 1,982
Corangamite 13,345 7 1,906
Southern Grampians 13,292 7 1,899
Indigo 12,403 7 1,772
Municipality Current estimate of Number of Number of voters voters councillors per councillor
Alpine 11,362 7 1,623
Central Goldfields 11,077 7 1,582
Northern Grampians 10,862 7 1,552
Mansfield 9,869 5 1,974
Strathbogie 9,224 7 1,318
Gannawarra 8,850 7 1,264
Loddon 7,756 5 1,551
Pyrenees 7,090 5 1,418
Yarriambiack 6,349 7 907
Buloke 6,027 7 861
Towong 5,472 5 1,094
Hindmarsh 5,049 6 842
Queenscliffe 4,265 5 853
West Wimmera 4,018 5 804
Mount Alexander Shire fits in the middle of the seven-councillor rural municipality band. The number of voters per councillor (2,200) is slightly above the median for seven-councillor rural municipalities (1,906). 14 There are no particular factors pointing towards an increase in the number of councillors. The Shire is not particularly large geographically (1,529 square kilometres
compared to a median for rural municipalities of 3,880), and there are no major topographical barriers to travel. The Shire’s population is growing evenly and gradually across the municipality, without large-scale developments. With 95% of the population speaking English only, there are no significant numbers of residents who are not proficient in English. One demographic characteristic of the Shire is a high proportion of older residents, with 41.38% aged 50 years or over compared to 35.13% for non- metropolitan Victoria as a whole.
The VEC considers that Mount Alexander Shire Council should continue to have seven councillors.
Preliminary Report
Electoral structure
Given that Mount Alexander Shire is to have seven councillors, the VEC believes that there are two practical options for the Shire’s electoral structure:
the current structure, of one three-councillor ward and four single-councillor wards; and an unsubdivided municipality.
Current structure
In the 2005–2005 electoral representation review, the VEC recommended combining the three wards covering the urban area of Castlemaine, while retaining single- councillor wards for the more rural parts of the Shire. This recommendation was based on communities of interest, with Castlemaine constituting one community and the other wards each being based on one or two townships (Calder Ward on Harcourt, Coliban Ward on Taradale and Chewton, Loddon Ward on Newstead and Guildford, and Tarrengower Ward on Maldon).
The Council submission supported retention of the current structure, stating:
There is a strong sense in the community that the geographic area that separates their Ward provides a strong sense of place and community. Ward Councillors are seen as representatives of their Wards and are often charged with taking up Ward causes on the behalf of residents or community groups.
... Residents of these [single-councillor] wards frequently take up matters of concern in these small communities with their Ward Councillor to ensure that their needs are given equal weight to the needs of those in large communities. Whilst these smaller communities do represent communities of interest, they are in themselves too small to have single Councillor representation and appear to 15 identify with the Ward in which they reside. Single-Councillor Wards provide smaller communities with an avenue to have their concerns heard and local issues supported, which may not be possible in larger multi-member Wards.
The submission by Castlemaine Action Inc. advocated dividing the Castlemaine Ward into three single-councillor wards, so that all councillors would be elected under the same system. The submission maintained that ‘Examination of past elections in Castlemaine Ward prove that the Proportional Voting system has been abused by candidates fielding multiple “running mates” in order to get elected’.
There is nothing inherent in proportional representation to encourage the proliferation of running mates. The VEC’s experience across Victoria is that running mates or ‘dummy candidates’, who nominate not to get elected but just to transfer preferences to ‘real’ candidates, are allegedly more of an issue in single-councillor wards.
The following table show the number of candidates in Mount Alexander Shire over the past four elections:
Ward 2000 2003 2005 2008
Barker 1 5 — —
Calder 2 2 2 5
Campbell 3 3 — —
Coliban 1 3 7 2
Forest 2 5 — —
Loddon 4 2 2 3
Tarrengower 1 5 2 3
Castlemaine — — 15 9
TOTAL 14 25 28 22
Urban wards 6 13 15 9
Rural wards 8 12 13 13
The large number of candidates for Castlemaine Ward in 2005 (the first election under the new structure) suggests that there may have been an issue with running mates at that election. However, at the 2008 election there were only nine candidates for three vacancies.
One of the potential problems with single-councillor wards, especially in the country, is that voters may be deprived of a wide choice. A popular councillor may gain such a hold that he or she is repeatedly unopposed, which means that voters have no choice at 16 all. This does not appear to have been the case in the rural wards of Mount Alexander
Shire, where there have been no unopposed elections since 2000.
The VEC considers that the current structure achieves fair and equitable representation for the voters of Mount Alexander Shire.
Ward boundaries
Enrolments for all of Mount Alexander Shire’s wards are within the 10% tolerance permitted by legislation. Enrolments for Calder and Tarrengower Wards are more than 5% below the average, while enrolment for Castlemaine Ward is 4.33% above the average. Ordinarily in these circumstances the VEC would adjust the ward boundaries to bring enrolments back towards the average and allow a margin for future population shifts. Because population growth is fairly uniform across the Shire, a boundary adjustment does not appear to be necessary in Mount Alexander Shire.
Preliminary Report
Ward names
The Shire’s rural wards are named after prominent geographical features: Coliban and Loddon Wards after the rivers that flow through the wards, Calder Ward after the highway, and Tarrengower Ward after the mountain that overlooks Maldon. The VEC believes it is undesirable to duplicate names used by other councils or levels of government. The name ‘Loddon Ward’ could be confused with the neighbouring Loddon Shire. Accordingly, the VEC suggests renaming this ward Strangways Ward, after the old goldmining locality between Guildford and Newstead. The VEC welcomes feedback from the community on the best name for the ward.
Unsubdivided municipality
The submission by Mr Keith Roberts concluded:
Councillors are each elected to represent the whole of the Shire, so, it is only fair and reasonable that there be an unsubdivided municipal district so that the voters of the whole shire elect 100% of the councillors. Build Bridges NOT Walls!
This statement covers two of the main perceived advantages of an unsubdivided structure:
that all voters can vote for all of the candidates, giving them a wide choice; and,
that councillors will be encouraged to take a shire-wide view of issues.
In a shire the size of Mount Alexander, it should be possible for candidates and councillors to cover the entire municipality, and the ballot paper should not be too big, as could occur in larger municipalities. It can also be noted that all candidates would require the same level of support to be elected, which is not the case under the current hybrid structure of one multi-councillor and four single-councillor wards.
For these reasons the VEC is putting forward an alternative option of an unsubdivided 17
structure. Recommendation — Option A (Preferred Option)
That the Mount Alexander Shire Council consist of seven councillors, to be elected from one three-councillor ward and four single-councillor wards, with unchanged ward boundaries.
Recommendation — Option B (Alternative Option)
That the Mount Alexander Shire Council consist of seven councillors, to be elected from an unsubdivided municipality.
Next steps
Any person or group, including the Council, can make a submission to the VEC in response to the recommendations contained in this report.
Response submissions to the Preliminary Report should address the models proposed by the VEC within the Preliminary Report.
Response submissions must be received by the VEC by 5.00pm on Friday, 29 April 2011. Late submissions will not be accepted.
As submissions are being reviewed by the VEC, there is an opportunity for people or organisations who have submitted a response submission to present at the public hearing. The public hearing will be held on Thursday, 5 May 2011. If you wish to speak at the public hearing, you will need to indicate this on your submission.
Where should I send my submission?
Submissions must include the name, address and contact telephone number of the submitter. Submissions without this information cannot be accepted.
Submissions can be submitted to the VEC via:
online: vec.vic.gov.au/Reviews email: [email protected] fax: (03) 9629 8632 18 post: Victorian Electoral Commission
Level 8, 505 Little Collins Street Melbourne, Vic 3000.
Public access to submissions
To ensure transparency in the Electoral Representation Review process, all submissions will be available for inspection by the public at:
the VEC office at Level 8, 505 Little Collins Street, Melbourne, Vic 3000; and, the VEC website at vec.vic.gov.au.
The name and locality of the submitter will be published with the submission. The VEC will not publish the telephone number, street address and signature of the submitter.
Preliminary Report
Public access to reports
The Final Report will be available from Tuesday, 24 May 2011. Copies of the Final Reports will be available from the VEC website, vec.vic.gov.au, by contacting the VEC on 131 VEC (131 832) and at the Mount Alexander Shire Council offices.
19
Appendix One: List of preliminary submitters
Preliminary submissions were received from:
Name
Castlemaine Action Inc.
Mount Alexander Shire Council
Proportional Representation Society of Australia (Victoria-Tasmania) Inc.
Keith Roberts
20
Preliminary Report
Appendix Two: Options maps
21
22
Victorian Electoral Commission Level 8, 505 Little Collins Street Melbourne, Vic 3000
131 VEC (131 832) [email protected] vec.vic.gov.au