ward

Friday June 24, 2016

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator Ð Friday June 24, 2016 Should HamiltonÕs ward boundaries be redrawn to reflect areas of growth, perhaps even adding a 16th ward? The question is, should they remain or should they go? Not just in Britain Ñ although the Brexit debate has been kind of important, too. Should Hamilton's 15 ward boundaries remain the same or change? That has been the topic at a series of public meetings on the issue Ñ the most recent this week at Waterdown's Legion Hall. But the tepid turnout in Waterdown Ñ only three people showed Ñ and also last week at Tim Hortons Field, suggests residents may not be all that engaged. In fairness, "Ward Boundary Review" is a subject hardly guaranteed to reel in even the most civic minded on a long, warm summer night. And Mayor Fred Eisenberger predicted neither councillors nor constituents would have much enthusiasm to tackle the issue. But last spring council voted to hire consultants to undertake a boundary review Ñ at cost of $270,000 Ñ to explore if changes would better reflect shifting population patterns. For example, Ward 7 on the central Mountain has 62,000 residents while rural Ward 14 in Flamborough has about 17,000. Among the alternatives suggested by the consultants: rearrange wards to follow federal riding boundaries; reshape wards to better reflect population; add a 16th ward. One option (shown on the map) shows a proposed Ward 16 on the Mountain, and also redrawing Ward 15 so it would geographically be smaller than it is now Ñ essentially Waterdown on its own, defined by Milburough Line to the east, Concession 7 to the north, Hwy 6. and Millgrove Sideroad to the west, to roughly the Niagara Escarpment along the southern border. Ward 15 Coun. Judi Partridge, whose ward is about 70 per cent rural, says consultants are paying too little attention to criteria such as culture, heritage, and the natural environment, and focusing too heavily on population. She added that

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday June 24, 2016

Should Hamilton’s ward boundaries be redrawn to reflect areas of growth, perhaps even adding a 16th ward?

The question is, should they remain or should they go?

Not just in Britain — although the Brexit debate has been kind of important, too.

Should Hamilton’s 15 ward boundaries remain the same or change?

That has been the topic at a series of public meetings on the issue — the most recent this week at Waterdown’s Legion Hall.

But the tepid turnout in Waterdown — only three people showed — and also last week at Tim Hortons Field, suggests residents may not be all that engaged.

In fairness, “Ward Boundary Review” is a subject hardly guaranteed to reel in even the most civic minded on a long, warm summer night.

April 26, 2012

April 26, 2012

And Mayor Fred Eisenberger predicted neither councillors nor constituents would have much enthusiasm to tackle the issue.

But last spring council voted to hire consultants to undertake a boundary review — at cost of $270,000 — to explore if changes would better reflect shifting population patterns.

For example, Ward 7 on the central Mountain has 62,000 residents while rural Ward 14 in Flamborough has about 17,000.

Among the alternatives suggested by the consultants: rearrange wards to follow federal riding boundaries; reshape wards to better reflect population; add a 16th ward.

One option (shown on the map) shows a proposed Ward 16 on the Mountain, and also redrawing Ward 15 so it would geographically be smaller than it is now — essentially Waterdown on its own, defined by Milburough Line to the east, Concession 7 to the north, Hwy 6. and Millgrove Sideroad to the west, to roughly the Niagara Escarpment along the southern border.

Ward 15 Coun. Judi Partridge, whose ward is about 70 per cent rural, says consultants are paying too little attention to criteria such as culture, heritage, and the natural environment, and focusing too heavily on population.

She added that the trio of residents who showed at the Waterdown meeting was pressed by consultants to pick a favourite option, but found the exercise too complex to choose.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. wrote in their report that electoral boundaries should be reviewed every 10-15 years, and Hamilton’s have been the same since amalgamation in 2001.(Source: Hamilton Spectator)

 

Monday April 30, 2012

By Graeme MacKay, Editorial Cartoonist, The Hamilton Spectator – Monday April 30, 2012

Lower city councillors back federal prostitution-reform backlash

Three lower-city councillors are backing a federal push against legalizing brothels.

Councillors Sam Merulla, Chad Collins and Bernie Morelli say they’re concerned about a recent provincial court decision that struck down the ban on bawdy houses.

Now, Merulla says he’s formally asking his council colleagues to back a federal government appeal announced Wednesday of the reformed prostitution laws.

“If the Ontario Court of Appeal decision is left unchallenged, it could see the introduction of brothels within Hamilton and other communities in Ontario,” they said in a statement.

The trio — who represent the central and eastern areas of the lower city — say legalizing brothels would condone prostitution and hurt their neighbourhoods.

“I think we speak for the vast majority of Hamiltonians, Ontarians and Canadians,” Merulla said Thursday.

But Merulla’s motion is already stirring up some discomfort — for sex workers, and for one of his colleagues.

Angel, who lives in Morelli’s ward, has been a sex worker for 36 years. She’s unsure why her councillor would concern himself with what happens within the privacy of her apartment.

“I think it’s ridiculous. I think he has other things that are more important to worry about in the neighbourhood, like the drug trade and crack houses,” she said.

“I think he should just leave people alone who are just trying to live honestly and not hurt anyone.” (Source: Hamilton Spectator)