9 PART 9 – PROPOSED SINGLE MEMBER PLURALITY BOUNDARIES E. The Okanagan 1. Evolution of the Okanagan P ART electoral districts Immediately prior to the work of the 9 – PRO 1966 Angus Commission, there were four electoral districts in the Okanagan P OSED (see Okanagan, Map 1). Moving from north to south, they were Salmon Arm, S North Okanagan, South Okanagan and INGLE ME Similkameen. M BER PLURALITY B OUNDARIES Okanagan, Map 1 114 PART 9 – PROPOSED SINGLE MEMBER PLURALITY BOUNDARIES 9 a. The Angus Commission (1966) The Angus Commission concluded that the proper and effective represen- tation of this region in the Legislative Assembly required four members. It 9 – PART PRO made several changes to the existing electoral districts (see Okanagan, Map 2). It expanded the Salmon Arm district farther south to include Enderby and P OSED Armstrong and recommended that the district be renamed Shuswap. In S Similkameen it moved the southwest INGLE ME boundary farther east so that Princeton became part of Yale-Lillooet, and ex- tended the southeast boundary farther M BER PLURALITY east to include Greenwood, Grand Forks and the area west of lower Arrow Lake. The Legislative Assembly adopted B these recommendations, changing the OUNDARIES name of the Similkameen district to Boundary-Similkameen. Okanagan, Map 2 115 9 PART 9 – PROPOSED SINGLE MEMBER PLURALITY BOUNDARIES b. The Norris Commission (1975) The Norris Commission also recom- mended the retention of four Okanag- an electoral districts. In Boundary- P ART Similkameen, it proposed moving the northern boundary farther north to 9 – PRO include Summerland and Peachland, and moving the southeastern boundary P OSED farther west, so that Midway, Green- wood and Grand Forks would become S part of the Rossland-Trail electoral INGLE ME district (see Okanagan, Map 3). The Legislative Assembly did not adopt M any of the Norris Commission’s recom- BER PLURALITY mendations. B OUNDARIES Okanagan, Map 3 116 PART 9 – PROPOSED SINGLE MEMBER PLURALITY BOUNDARIES 9 c. The Eckardt Commission (1978) Judge Eckardt recommended the con- tinuation of four electoral districts, but with several significant changes (Okanagan, Map 4). He proposed 9 – PART PRO that Shuswap be expanded eastward to include Revelstoke and part of Glacier National Park, and that the electoral dis- trict be renamed Shuswap-Revelstoke. In P OSED North Okanagan (which he proposed be renamed Okanagan-North), he recom- S mended that the resort area of Silver Star, INGLE ME Mabel Lake and Sugar Lake be trans- ferred from Shuswap to North Okanagan (due to transportation and other links to M BER PLURALITY Vernon) and that the three Lower Arrow Lake communities of Burton, Fauquier and Edgewood be transferred from Revelstoke-Slocan into North Okanagan. B In South Okanagan (which he pro- OUNDARIES posed be renamed Okanagan-South), he recommended that the northern boundary be extended farther north to include the entire City of Kelowna, and that the Big White Mountain resort area be transferred from Boundary- Similkameen to this district. In Boundary-Similkameen, he recom- mended that Summerland be trans- Okanagan, Map 4 ferred from South Okanagan to this electoral district, “due to the strong ties between that area and Penticton.” The Legislative Assembly adopted all of Judge Eckardt’s recommendations. 117 9 PART 9 – PROPOSED SINGLE MEMBER PLURALITY BOUNDARIES d. The Warren Commission (1982) Mr. Warren recommended that a sec- ond MLA be added to seven electoral districts, including Okanagan South, P ART but the Legislative Assembly did not adopt this recommendation. 9 – PRO e. The McAdam Commission (1984) P OSED The McAdam Commission recom- mended that a second MLA be added S to 11 one-member districts, includ- INGLE ME ing Okanagan South and Boundary- Similkameen. The Legislative Assembly adopted these recommendations, giving M the Okanagan six MLAs. BER PLURALITY f. The Fisher Commission (1988) Judge Fisher was required to eliminate the two-member ridings of Okanagan South and Boundary-Similkameen. In B OUNDARIES his interim report, he recommended that the number of Okanagan districts be increased from four to six (see Oka- nagan, Map 5), including the transfer of Revelstoke back to his proposed new Columbia River–Revelstoke district. He also divided Penticton down Main Street and Skaha Lake Road, and transferred Greenwood and Grand Forks into the proposed new Kootenay district of Grand Forks–Trail. Okanagan, Map 5 118 PART 9 – PROPOSED SINGLE MEMBER PLURALITY BOUNDARIES 9 In his final report, Judge Fisher con- tinued to recommend six electoral districts, but with some substantial revisions. For example, Kelowna West would span the lake, including the city’s 9 – PART PRO downtown core and Westbank. Pentic- ton would no longer be split between two electoral districts, and Okanagan- Boundary would extend from Hedley P OSED in the west to Christina Lake in the east. The Legislative Assembly adopted S all of Judge Fisher’s recommendations, INGLE ME changing the names of Kelowna East and Kelowna West to Okanagan East and Okanagan West, respectively (see M BER PLURALITY Okanagan, Map 6). g. The Wood Commission (1999) In its interim report, the Wood Com- mission observed that the deviations in B six Okanagan electoral districts ranged OUNDARIES from plus 54 percent to minus 21 per- cent, but was satisfied that these dispari- ties could be addressed through rebalancing the existing electoral dis- tricts rather than adding a seventh (see Okanagan, Map 7). The commission created a new electoral district exclusively west of Lake Okanagan (Okanagan-Westside), stretching from Okanagan, Map 6 119 9 PART 9 – PROPOSED SINGLE MEMBER PLURALITY BOUNDARIES Killeney Beach in the north to Sum- merland in the south. A new Penticton– Okanagan Valley district would now include Penticton and Naramata, but P ART would lose communities to the south- east (Bridesville, Rock Creek, Green- 9 – PRO wood and Grand Forks) to the pro- posed new West Kootenay–Boundary P OSED district, and would lose communities to the southwest (Cawston, Keremeos S and Hedley) to the proposed Yale- INGLE ME Similkameen district. In its final report, the Wood Com- M mission acknowledged strong public BER PLURALITY support for a seventh Okanagan district, but was not persuaded that the popula- tion warranted this step, and was not willing to recommend an even number (80) of electoral districts. Besides, it was B OUNDARIES necessary to transfer population from the southwest and southeast quadrants of Penticton-Okanagan Valley into Yale-Lillooet and West Kootenay– Boundary, respectively, to address serious under-population problems in those areas. Finally, the commission was unable to accede to the request that the District of Summerland be included in Penticton–Okanagan Valley, as it would produce a deviation well above plus Okanagan, Map 7 25 percent. The Legislative Assembly adopted all of the Wood Commission’s recom- mendations. 120 PART 9 – PROPOSED SINGLE MEMBER PLURALITY BOUNDARIES 9 2. Our analysis of the Okanagan electoral districts The geographical area that we define tricts). In our view, that would be too • The electoral districts centred as the Okanagan region currently has high for such a fast-growing area. around Penticton, Kelowna and six electoral districts (see map, page It would also result in the arbitrary Vernon have grown dramatically 9 – PART PRO 124). Commencing in the north they carving up of many communities shar- since the 1996 census, with are Shuswap, Okanagan-Vernon, Kel- ing long-standing interests, a result that continued growth anticipated. owna–Lake Country, Kelowna-Mission, we should avoid. Okanagan-Westside and Penticton– Having redefined our outer boundaries P OSED Okanagan Valley. These electoral Given this region’s population growth for the Okanagan region, we began districts, with their deviations at the time and our desire to respect community reconfiguring electoral districts, with S of the 1996 census, and now, are as fol- interests, we concluded the Okanagan’s the goal of having seven electoral INGLE ME lows (see Table 11): representation should be increased from districts that would, as much as pos- six to seven electoral districts. sible, preserve the integrity of munici- TABLE 11: CURRENT SMP ELECTORAL pal boundaries and that would respect M BER PLURALITY DISTRICTS IN THE OKANAGAn We began by reviewing what people other important community interests. Electoral 1996 2006 had told us during the public consul- District deviation* deviation** tation, and what anomalies had been Beginning in the north, our proposed Shuswap +2.6% -0.7% identified in the 1999 Wood Commis- Shuswap electoral district (see map of Okanagan-Vernon +17.4% +16.9% sion report – areas that should have proposed Shuswap electoral district B Kelowna–Lake Country +8.8% +18% been put into one electoral district, but page 126) is very similar to the cur- OUNDARIES Kelowna-Mission +11.3% +16.7% were put into another for overriding rent district. It will include Sicamous, Okanagan-Westside -7.2% -1.5% population reasons. For example: Salmon Arm, Enderby, Armstrong and Penticton– • Summerland and Penticton are Spallumcheen. It will have a deviation Okanagan Valley +18.2% +12.4% neighbours but were, for population- of plus 5.7 percent based on 81 * based on 1996 census data, and assuming balancing reasons, placed into differ- electoral districts. 79 electoral districts ent electoral districts. ** based on 2006 census data, and assuming • Keremeos and other southern Moving southward, we have been able 79 electoral districts Similkameen communities have a to create an electoral district that is natural affinity to Oliver and Osoy- quite similar to the current Okanagan- These six electoral districts have a total oos, and should be in an Okanagan Vernon electoral district, except that it population of 344,623. If we were to based district. does not extend west of Lake Okanag- rebalance the population among all six • For the reasons discussed earlier in an.