Ottawa's municipal ward boundaries

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Marcus CLS

It seems the time I spent filling in the survey was a big waste of my f###ing time.

Welcome to City of Ottawa consultations!

[J.OT13]

I can live with this as long as they don't arbitrarily add a fourth rural Ward at the last minute to appease the few.

[Proof Sheet]

Was the idea of actually reducing the # of elected officials ever on the list of possibilities. I'd be in favour of that and an actual limit on the number of terms you can serve...and as well to forbid any Councillor saying that the reason that they were running again was because 'there were so many unfinished issues/projects/items to be completed and that they had the leadership qualities to complete them with a steady hand at the wheel'.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Proof Sheet

Was the idea of actually reducing the # of elected officials ever on the list of possibilities. I'd be in favour of that and an actual limit on the number of terms you can serve...and as well to forbid any Councillor saying that the reason that they were running again was because 'there were so many unfinished issues/projects/items to be completed and that they had the leadership qualities to complete them with a steady hand at the wheel'.

There was a 17 Ward option that would have given the inner-Greenbelt a slight edge over suburban/rural, but it was quickly rejected because, according to Watson, Ottawa is such a large city geographically that we need more Councillors to adequately represent the City's population. That's despite the fact that a. he himself promised a smaller Council when he was elected in 2010 and quickly dropped the idea after one vote on the issue and b. the built-up area of Ottawa (inner-Greenbelt+Kanata/Stittsville+Barrhaven/Riverside South+Orleans) is just about the same size as Calgary and Edmonton (15 and 13 seats around their respective Council tables).

[jleiper]

Originally Posted by Proof Sheet

Having dealt with the two Councillors you named and also rural councillors, I can say that sometimes Councillors get way too involved in the micro details of projects and don't know when to leave it up to the professional staff who are experts in these things.

I think you're downplaying the work of rural councillors.

As long as some decisions like land-use planning decisions are subject to a vote of Council, politicians will get their hands dirty on those. We're pushed by constituents to get involved even in the fine details of proposals by residents who ultimately elect us. A politician who limits their involvement to selling the perspective of City staff has a very short shelf-life, as we've seen over and over again in election results.

That's not a bad thing. While I have tremendous respect for our staff across the organization, there's a reason municipal government is set up with "civilians" having the final say. Residents' involvement through their elected representatives often end up creating better outcomes by pushing hard against constraints and inertia. There aren't actually that many staff working in disciplines at the city where you can absolutely say they have an expertise that is objectively out of the purview of most residents. Engineers, for example, are one. Public health nurses another. They're few and far between.

I'll give one example. There's a building nearing completion at Parkdale and Wellington. One of the preparatory works for that was to install a new Hydro vault on Wellington, which necessitated closing the sidewalk for an extended period. I got a head's-up that this was going to happen, and was alarmed. The Parkdale-Rosemount stretch is a very long one, and the sidewalk traversed by probably thousands of people a day. Residents of Grace Manor frequently have visitors who like pushing them in their wheelchairs to the Parkdale Market. Closing the sidewalk for a couple of months would have a major impact.

Rather than simply accept that this was inevitable, I went back and forth with traffic staff for a couple of weeks looking at options. Finally, I asked them to join me on site. As we spoke I was looking around, and I asked whether we couldn't just remove the fence at the corner, put in a cheap and temporary ramp over a curb, and detour pedestrians through the parking lot. The first reaction was that that was private property, so could be challenging. I pointed out that the entire reason for the project was to permit a re-development of that lot. The end result was that a nice wide accessible pedestrian detour was created through the parking lot parallel to the sidewalk (maybe three times the normal sidewalk width) with virtually no extra effort other than to put up some Moduloc, unbolt a piece of fence, and put in a few feet of temporary asphalt, as well as securing the landowner's permission - the same landowner who would be benefiting from the project.

Residents and politicians bring experience and valid perspectives to the work of the City. If there were truly a class of cognoscenti with unassailable expertise we'd simply set up a technocracy and remove the public from decision-making altogether. But that's not the case. Planners built Pruitt Igoe. They can and should be questioned, even on the small things. Residents are right to expect that their elected reps will facilitate that interchange of ideas and perspectives. The more involved and engaged residents are, the more involved and engaged their elected officials can and should be.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Proof Sheet

Was the idea of actually reducing the # of elected officials ever on the list of possibilities.

What, other than satisfying some "small government" fetish, would that accomplish?

I'd be in favour of that and an actual limit on the number of terms you can serve...

I would not be in favour of creating a council that had a steady population of lame ducks.

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by jleiper

As long as some decisions like land-use planning decisions are subject to a vote of Council, politicians will get their hands dirty on those. We're pushed by constituents to get involved even in the fine details of proposals by residents who ultimately elect us. A politician who limits their involvement to selling the perspective of City staff has a very short shelf-life, as we've seen over and over again in election results.

That's not a bad thing. While I have tremendous respect for our staff across the organization, there's a reason municipal government is set up with "civilians" having the final say. Residents' involvement through their elected representatives often end up creating better outcomes by pushing hard against constraints and inertia. There aren't actually that many staff working in disciplines at the city where you can absolutely say they have an expertise that is objectively out of the purview of most residents. Engineers, for example, are one. Public health nurses another. They're few and far between.

I'll give one example. There's a building nearing completion at Parkdale and Wellington. One of the preparatory works for that was to install a new Hydro vault on Wellington, which necessitated closing the sidewalk for an extended period. I got a head's-up that this was going to happen, and was alarmed. The Parkdale-Rosemount stretch is a very long one, and the sidewalk traversed by probably thousands of people a day. Residents of Grace Manor frequently have visitors who like pushing them in their wheelchairs to the Parkdale Market. Closing the sidewalk for a couple of months would have a major impact.

Rather than simply accept that this was inevitable, I went back and forth with traffic staff for a couple of weeks looking at options. Finally, I asked them to join me on site. As we spoke I was looking around, and I asked whether we couldn't just remove the fence at the corner, put in a cheap and temporary ramp over a curb, and detour pedestrians through the parking lot. The first reaction was that that was private property, so could be challenging. I pointed out that the entire reason for the project was to permit a re-development of that lot. The end result was that a nice wide accessible pedestrian detour was created through the parking lot parallel to the sidewalk (maybe three times the normal sidewalk width) with virtually no extra effort other than to put up some Moduloc, unbolt a piece of fence, and put in a few feet of temporary asphalt, as well as securing the landowner's permission - the same landowner who would be benefiting from the project.

Residents and politicians bring experience and valid perspectives to the work of the City. If there were truly a class of cognoscenti with unassailable expertise we'd simply set up a technocracy and remove the public from decision-making altogether. But that's not the case. Planners built Pruitt Igoe. They can and should be questioned, even on the small things. Residents are right to expect that their elected reps will facilitate that interchange of ideas and perspectives. The more involved and engaged residents are, the more involved and engaged their elected officials can and should be.

Thanks for the insight. Many City issues could be quickly resolved by actually getting out of the office/home office/living room and seeing a site in real time and solutions can be quickly resolved. Getting everybody to agree to visit at the same time can often be problematic.

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

What, other than satisfying some "small government" fetish, would that accomplish?



I would not be in favour of creating a council that had a steady population of lame ducks.

I think it should have been on the table. From what I can see the preferred option has one more ward in total and the number of urban/suburban wards has increased by 2 and the number of rural wards has decreased by 1. There is a lot of fighting over whether a certain urban neighbourhoood is more closely connected with neighbourhoods it is adjacent to in certain directions and not in others. Some areas don't want to be connected with others.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Proof Sheet

I think it should have been on the table. From what I can see the preferred option has one more ward in total and the number of urban/suburban wards has increased by 2 and the number of rural wards has decreased by 1. There is a lot of fighting over whether a certain urban neighbourhoood is more closely connected with neighbourhoods it is adjacent to in certain directions and not in others. Some areas don't want to be connected with others.

"Lame ducks" was in reference to the idea of term limits, not the size of council.

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

"Lame ducks" was in reference to the idea of term limits, not the size of council.

I'm aware of lame ducks..I do find though that Councillors get stale after a certain period of time.

What I really hate is that when it is re-election time the incumbents trot out the standard 'elect me to finish the unfinished jobs that still need to be tackled in the ward' reason to re-elect them.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Proof Sheet

I'm aware of lame ducks..I do find though that Councillors get stale after a certain period of time.

That is not what "lame duck" means.

An elected official is not a "lame duck" by virtue of having been in office a long time, whatever other problems long-term incumbency may cause to their brains. They become a "lame duck" when they are still in office, but know they never have to face the electorate again.

Term limits are a solution in search of a problem.

[rocketphish]

McKellar Park residents upset at proposed ward boundary changes
New map moves the neighbourhood from Kitchissippi to Bay ward

Sarah Kester · CBC News
Posted: Nov 30, 2020 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 9 hours ago

Residents in Ottawa's McKellar Park neighbourhood are upset by a proposed electoral map that would move them from Kitchissippi ward to Bay ward.

The new map, which would see city council grow by one in the next municipal election, is favoured by independent consultants. It's the sixth map presented to council and was requested in July after the first five maps met with widespread disapproval.

McKellar Park residents Stacey Coburn and her husband Matthew Baraniak said they feel there's been little transparency, given how late the changes came in the consultation process.

"This really wasn't communicated well to residents," Coburn said. "It was handled in a way that was very complicated and somewhat withholding, to be honest with you — that this option wasn't even on the table several months ago."

"We have a community here, and it's important that such big decisions be transparent," Baraniak said. "As citizens of the ward, we deserve that."

Sybil Powell, president of the McKellar Park Community Association, said the neighbourhood's residents feel a close identity with Kitchissippi: they shop and send their kids to school in neighbouring Westboro and are invested in ward's more urban issues.

"We sort of thought of us as being part of that downtown, sort of semi-downtown ... feeling, which is not the same as being in the suburban ward," she said.

Powell wrote an open letter to Mayor Jim Watson, posted on the association's website, that details a list of concerns McKellar Park residents have about the shift. Many residents, including Coburn and Baraniak, have also written to the mayor and to Kitchissippi Coun. Jeff Leiper.

The neighbourhood isn't being moved to Bay ward, Powell noted, because the two wards' issues are closely aligned.

"They're moving the boundary on a numbers issue. And the numbers aren't big," she said.

Leiper told CBC he'd originally asked to keep Kitchissippi's boundaries intact, and while he's received dozens of letters from residents, the ward is becoming overpopulated — making it harder to offer proper representation.

"Kitchissippi is well over the amount of population that it should have for one councillor to be able to serve effectively," he said, adding the proposed change would move around 7,000 residents out of the ward.

But Powell said Bay ward will also become more dense, with developments going in around future LRT stations, and feels moving the eight blocks that make up McKellar Park won't make much of a difference.

Many McKellar Park residents also expressed worry that school boundary lines will change and they will no longer be able to send their children to Broadview Public School.

Leiper said he's asked the school board about this possibility and doesn't think it's likely to happen.

"If you've got an elementary school across the street, the school board is not going to make the street the boundary," he said.

The recommended new ward boundaries go to finance committee Tuesday for approval, then on to city council Dec. 9.

Leiper said he hasn't decided how he will vote, but vowed to take all concerns into consideration before making up his mind.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...nges-1.5821358

[J.OT13]

It's impossible to make everyone happy. Changes to ward boundaries proposed with option 6 are not as dramatic as the other options. Moving the more suburban McKellar Park to Bay Ward makes a lot of sense considering the massive development boom in Kitchissippi, and Bay's decently similar makeup to Kitchissippi (decently urban in nature). At least they're not moving to College Ward.

[J.OT13]

A whole lot has happened today at FEDCO regarding the a Ward boundaries. Basically, it seems FEDCO took option 6 and made a slew of amendments to move the boundaries back where they were originally as much as possible. Only amendment rejected was the McKellar Park motion to keep it in Kitchissippi.

This one confuses me. I can't for the life of me figure this one out. Will an Orleans Ward eat-up part of the new Osgood Ward? I feel like the boundaries defined by the motion don't make sense.

Kate Porter
@KatePorterCBC

FEDco votes to change the electoral ward lines in rural east end, from the consultants' recommendation. It's been a big issue for new Cumberland councillor Kitts.

Only Moffatt votes against (he voted against all of the changes). #ottnews #ottcity



2:29 PM · Dec 1, 2020·Twitter Web App

This was the proposed Ward before the amendment.

Kate Porter
@KatePorterCBC

The motion moves lines consultants drew for a giant rural ward. If I read it correctly, Navan stays out of it.

Darouze, who struggled to cover the distance while acting before byelection, thanks the mayor for listening. Says motion addresses residents' issues. #ottcity #ottnews



12:05 PM · Dec 1, 2020·Twitter Web App

[J.OT13]

I was able to figure out the chunk included in that motion, but still unsure what that motion does. This chunk is already RW1 in option 6.

EDIT:

Area north of Wilhaven has already been added to RW-4 (north Orleans) by the consultants based on community input.
The motion that speaks to the huge chunk south of Wilhaven, east of VIA/Milton would be added to RW-6 (Orleans South).

Again though, the motion's wording seems off (RW-1 be amended to include). South of Russell Road also doesn't make sense. Should be north, right?

[Marshsparrow]

Life was so much easier before amalgamation...

[rocketphish]

Committee tweaks ward boundaries in response to concerns from east-end francophone community

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Publishing date: Dec 01, 2020 • Last Updated 47 minutes ago • 3 minute read

The committee in charge of scrutinizing proposed ward boundary changes took a pencil to the map on Tuesday in an attempt to soothe concerns in rural east Ottawa, even as consultants warned against tinkering with their recommendations.

The finance and economic development committee approved a handful of amending motions, but the most impactful was related to suburban and rural east communities under a new 24-ward map. The city currently has 23 wards.

Proposed boundaries in the Cumberland-Orléans-Osgoode area have been the most controversial, since a previous version had much of rural Cumberland fused with Osgoode ward. Francophone residents feared seeing their interests diminished by being transferred to Osgoode ward.

Don Boudria, the former MP, told the committee about the threat of diluting the francophone community in east Ottawa by drawing new ward boundaries.

Linda Dunn, who was a councillor in the former Cumberland township, told councillors that the old township area should be tied to Orléans, not Osgoode. “We have no tie with Osgoode,” Dunn said.

The committee voted to split today’s Cumberland ward across three wards. A northern section with Cumberland village would be pulled into Orléans ward, a middle section would include south-Orléans neighbourhoods and rural villages of Navan and Sarsfield, while a southern portion including Carlsbad Springs and Vars would be pulled into Osgoode ward.

Councillors Catherine Kitts, Matthew Luloff and George Darouze — who represent Cumberland, Orléans and Osgoode wards, respectively, — received credit for working on an amendment to the rural-east boundaries in response to concerns in the francophone communities.

When it comes to the idea of combining rural Cumberland with Osgoode ward, there have been criticisms that the massive ward would be too difficult to cover for one councillor.

Coun. Eli El-Chantiry, who voiced cautious support for splitting Cumberland ward three ways, said it’s “B.S.” that a big ward can’t be effectively represented, since he has represented a geographically large West Carleton-March ward for years.

The consultants hired by the city to recommend new ward boundaries weren’t supportive of the committee’s redrawn eastern ward boundaries since they tried to protect rural interests by not pulling in suburban communities.

Gary Davidson, one of the consultants who recommended the new ward boundary map, voiced deep skepticism.

Changes to ward boundaries can be appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT), which could be a problem for council if it doesn’t have it’s own hired experts on side.

“We would stand by our report in front of the LPAT,” Davidson said.

The committee also made boundary changes around Eastway Gardens, around the future Ottawa Hospital Civic campus near Dow’s Lake and in part of Vanier.

McKellar Park residents have voiced opposition to a proposal to transfer the community from Kitchissippi ward to neighbouring Bay ward, but their concerns fell on deaf ears at the committee, which unanimously rejected a motion to keep the community as part of Kitchissippi.

Councillors said their tweaks to the consultants’ boundary recommendations shouldn’t be considered gerrymandering since the changes address bona fide community concerns, like the threat of dividing the rural-east francophone community.

The new ward boundaries would take effect for the 2022 municipal election.

No one on the committee took issue with adding another ward, and thus, another councillor. With the mayor, a council elected in 2022 would have 25 members.

Council will be asked to ratify the committee’s decision on Dec. 9.

jwilling@postmedia.com
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...hone-community

[Fraser]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I was able to figure out the chunk included in that motion, but still unsure what that motion does. This chunk is already RW1 in option 6.

EDIT:

Area north of Wilhaven has already been added to RW-4 (north Orleans) by the consultants based on community input.
The motion that speaks to the huge chunk south of Wilhaven, east of VIA/Milton would be added to RW-6 (Orleans South).

Again though, the motion's wording seems off (RW-1 be amended to include). South of Russell Road also doesn't make sense. Should be north, right?

I think the approved motion was edited from W1 to W6 ... so south of Wilhaven and north of Russell stays with Cumberland but the rest goes to Osgoode. I think.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

Life was so much easier before amalgamation...

Yup. They should have split Ottawa into three: inside the Greenbelt, rural/suburban east of the Rideau and rural/suburban west of the Rideau.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Yup. They should have split Ottawa into three: inside the Greenbelt, rural/suburban east of the Rideau and rural/suburban west of the Rideau.

That defeats the purpose of amalgamation, which was unified service agencies and governments structures for a given region.

Amalgamation isn't so much the issue as how governance favouring rural and suburban areas was prioritized.