Redistribution of Federal Electoral Districts 2012

[King of Kensington]

Really captures the general picture...as expected the Trinity-Spadina Chinese community is clustered along Dundas St., from Beverley to Bathurst and beyond, to about Grace.  It really cuts up the community; I have no doubt that Olivia's office is aware of this.  

It's unfortunate that MPs get so attached to their ridings that they take such illogical stances.

Right now Olivia's office has no "official position" on the new proposal and is inviting community consultations.    We'll see where that goes but the problem is that upper middle class busybodies tend to dominate the process.  But maybe St. Paul's won't look so bad to Annex residents after all.    

[Krago]

Here are two more downtown Toronto scenarios to consider.

• The ridings have roughly equal populations
• Forest Hill and Rosedale are placed in the same seat
• Kensington/Chinatown is kept together, as is the St. Lawrence neighbourhood
• Davenport (which really should change its name) would become even more Portuguese
• Carolyn Bennett would really REALLY hate it

[King of Kensington]

University-Oakwood: A gerrymandered riding to Olivia's liking!

[Benj]

Here are two more downtown Toronto scenarios to consider.

• The ridings have roughly equal populations
• Forest Hill and Rosedale are placed in the same seat
• Kensington/Chinatown is kept together, as is the St. Lawrence neighbourhood
• Davenport (which really should change its name) would become even more Portuguese
• Carolyn Bennett would really REALLY hate it

This is much better, I think. Forest Hill-Rosedale is an extremely natural seat and should be kept more or less this way as the others are changed.

I would keep the southern border of Davenport and expand it in the north instead, though (to prevent University-Oakwood from being so elongated, and take the southern addition to Davenport and put it in University-Oakwood instead).

Alternatively, is it possible to combine Chinatown in the inland seat instead, and have the condo seat push into Toronto Centre to take in the Garden District? That involves splitting up downtown, but I don't think that's so bad. Basically, changing the focus from north-south districts (as historically) to east-west districts. Maybe a Toronto-Fort York seat and a University-Chinatown seat (maybe Wellesley-Dundas?) and then something inland (maybe just called Oakwood? Or Bloor-Oakwood?).

I wish I had the data to more easily fiddle around with.

[King of Kensington]

OK I have two requests:

Alterations within the 3 downtown ridings:

- Take all of the area west of University between Dundas and College into Spadina-Fort York
- Move all of Spadina-Fort York east of York St./University Ave. to Toronto Centre, including the islands
- Move the territory between Bay and Yonge, College and Charles to University-Rosedale

Return of the earlier Mount Pleasant proposal with minor adjustments on the TC/Mt. P. boundary:

- Move the Mt. P/TC boundary to Dundas west of Yonge and to Charles between Yonge and Jarvis/Mount Pleasant, and follow the Bloor/Rosedale Valley line as in the previous proposal
- Leave Trinity-Spadina and St. Paul's with Bloor St. boundary as in the first proposal
- Fix the northern spillover of Mount Pleasant by reinstating Toronto North (but with the name of Don Valley West) and Eglinton-Lawrence retaining the CNR boundary on the west but with Avenue Rd. above Lawrence

[Krago]

Here are two more downtown Toronto scenarios to consider.

• The ridings have roughly equal populations
• Forest Hill and Rosedale are placed in the same seat
• Kensington/Chinatown is kept together, as is the St. Lawrence neighbourhood
• Davenport (which really should change its name) would become even more Portuguese
• Carolyn Bennett would really REALLY hate it

This is much better, I think. Forest Hill-Rosedale is an extremely natural seat and should be kept more or less this way as the others are changed.

I would keep the southern border of Davenport and expand it in the north instead, though (to prevent University-Oakwood from being so elongated, and take the southern addition to Davenport and put it in University-Oakwood instead).

Alternatively, is it possible to combine Chinatown in the inland seat instead, and have the condo seat push into Toronto Centre to take in the Garden District? That involves splitting up downtown, but I don't think that's so bad. Basically, changing the focus from north-south districts (as historically) to east-west districts. Maybe a Toronto-Fort York seat and a University-Chinatown seat (maybe Wellesley-Dundas?) and then something inland (maybe just called Oakwood? Or Bloor-Oakwood?).

I wish I had the data to more easily fiddle around with.

The proposed (and current) riding of Davenport has 102,360 people.  The Oakwood-Vaughan neighbourhood in the NW corner of St. Paul's (west of Winona) has 10,980 people, so adding that area to the existing riding would throw off the population balance in downtown Toronto.

However, here's an alternative for you to consider, based on your later comments.

Benj Alternative - Federal

Benj Alternative - Provincial

[Krago]

OK I have two requests:

Alterations within the 3 downtown ridings:

- Take all of the area west of University between Dundas and College into Spadina-Fort York
- Move all of Spadina-Fort York east of York St./University Ave. to Toronto Centre, including the islands
- Move the territory between Bay and Yonge, College and Charles to University-Rosedale

Your proposal would leave University-Rosedale with 86,000 people and Toronto Centre with 107,500.  Would you want to move 'The Village' (north of Carlton, west of Jarvis - 12,400 people) from TC to UR to equalize the numbers?

Return of the earlier Mount Pleasant proposal with minor adjustments on the TC/Mt. P. boundary:

- Move the Mt. P/TC boundary to Dundas west of Yonge and to Charles between Yonge and Jarvis/Mount Pleasant, and follow the Bloor/Rosedale Valley line as in the previous proposal
- Leave Trinity-Spadina and St. Paul's with Bloor St. boundary as in the first proposal
- Fix the northern spillover of Mount Pleasant by reinstating Toronto North (but with the name of Don Valley West) and Eglinton-Lawrence retaining the CNR boundary on the west but with Avenue Rd. above Lawrence

And now, here's something we hope you'll really like!

King Alternative - Federal

King Alternative - Provincial

[Hatman 🍁]

If you're doing requests, why not do a map with 4 skinny ridings? Give them some historical provincialeque names.

[Krago]

Ian Scott was barely re-elected in 1990 in St. George-St. David.  Afterward, he spent most of his time at his law firm and became known as the honourable member for St. Gowling-St. Strathy.

By the way, St. Paul's began as a downtown Toronto riding, and slowly worked its way northward to Forest Hill.


Hatman, did you just move from Ottawa to PEI?  Was Mike Duffy on your flight?

[Benj]

Here are two more downtown Toronto scenarios to consider.

• The ridings have roughly equal populations
• Forest Hill and Rosedale are placed in the same seat
• Kensington/Chinatown is kept together, as is the St. Lawrence neighbourhood
• Davenport (which really should change its name) would become even more Portuguese
• Carolyn Bennett would really REALLY hate it

This is much better, I think. Forest Hill-Rosedale is an extremely natural seat and should be kept more or less this way as the others are changed.

I would keep the southern border of Davenport and expand it in the north instead, though (to prevent University-Oakwood from being so elongated, and take the southern addition to Davenport and put it in University-Oakwood instead).

Alternatively, is it possible to combine Chinatown in the inland seat instead, and have the condo seat push into Toronto Centre to take in the Garden District? That involves splitting up downtown, but I don't think that's so bad. Basically, changing the focus from north-south districts (as historically) to east-west districts. Maybe a Toronto-Fort York seat and a University-Chinatown seat (maybe Wellesley-Dundas?) and then something inland (maybe just called Oakwood? Or Bloor-Oakwood?).

I wish I had the data to more easily fiddle around with.

The proposed (and current) riding of Davenport has 102,360 people.  The Oakwood-Vaughan neighbourhood in the NW corner of St. Paul's (west of Winona) has 10,980 people, so adding that area to the existing riding would throw off the population balance in downtown Toronto.

However, here's an alternative for you to consider, based on your later comments.

Benj Alternative - Federal

Benj Alternative - Provincial

I'm very satisfied with that. The only slight change I would make would be to see if it's possible to avoid splitting the university, but only if it's possible with fairly minimal changes.

I also dislike the St. Paul's name and think Forest Hill-Rosedale is a much better name, but it doesn't really matter.

Out of curiosity--who won St. Paul's and Toronto Centre federally on that map? Hard to tell between Con and Lib for St. Paul's and between NDP and Lib for Toronto Centre.

[Krago]

St. Paul's: LIB +2,900
Toronto Centre: LIB +1,600

[lilTommy]

If you're doing requests, why not do a map with 4 skinny ridings? Give them some historical provincialeque names.

I would love to see this! it would be like the 60's-70's all over again!

[lilTommy]

Here are two more downtown Toronto scenarios to consider.

• The ridings have roughly equal populations
• Forest Hill and Rosedale are placed in the same seat
• Kensington/Chinatown is kept together, as is the St. Lawrence neighbourhood
• Davenport (which really should change its name) would become even more Portuguese
• Carolyn Bennett would really REALLY hate it

This is much better, I think. Forest Hill-Rosedale is an extremely natural seat and should be kept more or less this way as the others are changed.

I would keep the southern border of Davenport and expand it in the north instead, though (to prevent University-Oakwood from being so elongated, and take the southern addition to Davenport and put it in University-Oakwood instead).

Alternatively, is it possible to combine Chinatown in the inland seat instead, and have the condo seat push into Toronto Centre to take in the Garden District? That involves splitting up downtown, but I don't think that's so bad. Basically, changing the focus from north-south districts (as historically) to east-west districts. Maybe a Toronto-Fort York seat and a University-Chinatown seat (maybe Wellesley-Dundas?) and then something inland (maybe just called Oakwood? Or Bloor-Oakwood?).

I wish I had the data to more easily fiddle around with.

The proposed (and current) riding of Davenport has 102,360 people.  The Oakwood-Vaughan neighbourhood in the NW corner of St. Paul's (west of Winona) has 10,980 people, so adding that area to the existing riding would throw off the population balance in downtown Toronto.

However, here's an alternative for you to consider, based on your later comments.

Benj Alternative - Federal

Benj Alternative - Provincial

I really like the flow, and how easily these proposals fit together. Communities of interest for the most part look to be held together utilizing Queen street for the most part as a dividing line between Trinity-Spadina, TC and Fort York.
Federally - The NDP wins handily (by the looks of it) Fort York and TC becomes a battle ground for between the LIB/NDP.
Provincially - The NDP has a long way to go to win over Davenport, Fort York and Toronto Centre.

Do we know if the final report is the last word on the boundaries? Cause we have some great ideas being thrown around here... Olivia should see the "Benji Alternative"

[MaxQue]

Here are two more downtown Toronto scenarios to consider.

• The ridings have roughly equal populations
• Forest Hill and Rosedale are placed in the same seat
• Kensington/Chinatown is kept together, as is the St. Lawrence neighbourhood
• Davenport (which really should change its name) would become even more Portuguese
• Carolyn Bennett would really REALLY hate it

This is much better, I think. Forest Hill-Rosedale is an extremely natural seat and should be kept more or less this way as the others are changed.

I would keep the southern border of Davenport and expand it in the north instead, though (to prevent University-Oakwood from being so elongated, and take the southern addition to Davenport and put it in University-Oakwood instead).

Alternatively, is it possible to combine Chinatown in the inland seat instead, and have the condo seat push into Toronto Centre to take in the Garden District? That involves splitting up downtown, but I don't think that's so bad. Basically, changing the focus from north-south districts (as historically) to east-west districts. Maybe a Toronto-Fort York seat and a University-Chinatown seat (maybe Wellesley-Dundas?) and then something inland (maybe just called Oakwood? Or Bloor-Oakwood?).

I wish I had the data to more easily fiddle around with.

The proposed (and current) riding of Davenport has 102,360 people.  The Oakwood-Vaughan neighbourhood in the NW corner of St. Paul's (west of Winona) has 10,980 people, so adding that area to the existing riding would throw off the population balance in downtown Toronto.

However, here's an alternative for you to consider, based on your later comments.

Benj Alternative - Federal

Benj Alternative - Provincial

I really like the flow, and how easily these proposals fit together. Communities of interest for the most part look to be held together utilizing Queen street for the most part as a dividing line between Trinity-Spadina, TC and Fort York.
Federally - The NDP wins handily (by the looks of it) Fort York and TC becomes a battle ground for between the LIB/NDP.
Provincially - The NDP has a long way to go to win over Davenport, Fort York and Toronto Centre.

Do we know if the final report is the last word on the boundaries? Cause we have some great ideas being thrown around here... Olivia should see the "Benji Alternative"

MPs can object to the Procedure committee, the committee writes a report to the commission, which has to answer them and modify the map or justify their refusal to not do the change. The process already began and today, the Procedure committee sent the report to the Alberta commission.

[Benj]

Quick, someone who isn't just a random American send this to Olivia Chow! I want to feel in some slight way partially responsible for something in Canadian politics.

[King of Kensington]

I can do that!  Just met with her office today and showed them both "University-Oakwood" and slightly altered Mount Pleasant" proposals.  This map with T-S taking Hillcrest/Bracondale and St. Paul's with Rosedale is quite sensible as well, though I don't think the NDP in TC will be happy with it (though still a great improvement for them from than what they have now!)

(She's almost certainly running for mayor BTW).

[Hatman 🍁]

Ian Scott was barely re-elected in 1990 in St. George-St. David.  Afterward, he spent most of his time at his law firm and became known as the honourable member for St. Gowling-St. Strathy.

By the way, St. Paul's began as a downtown Toronto riding, and slowly worked its way northward to Forest Hill.


Hatman, did you just move from Ottawa to PEI?  Was Mike Duffy on your flight?

Ha, no. It's out of respect for Stompin' Tom

[lilTommy]

Quick, someone who isn't just a random American send this to Olivia Chow! I want to feel in some slight way partially responsible for something in Canadian politics.

I just forwarded the Benji Alternative to Olivia via FB.

So King of Kensington, what was their response? was their any idea if Olivia will speak out against the final report at the procedure committee?

Ya, i read that she's "Considering" it... sad, she will be a greatly missed MP. But makes for some fun speculation as to who will run in those three ridings for the NDP now.

[King of Kensington]

Olivia's office "officially" has no position and is consulting the community.  I definitely got the sense though that they are not happy about University-Rosedale (who is?) and the Dundas St. boundary.  And obviously they are very attached to the Annex.  I will be in further contact with her office about this.

[Poirot]

I have a problem with two riding names in the Montreal area.

The final report names a riding Saint-Léonard-Villeray. It is the Saint-Léonard-Saint-Michel riding with minor changes. I don't get why they changed the name because Saint-Michel seems much more appropriate to me than Villeray. I consider Villeray to be in Papineau riding and no part is in the Saint-Léonard riding. Villeray is in the borough name but the part in the Saint-Léonard riding is Saint-Michel. That is from my understanding of Montreal neighbourhoods anyway.

I also have a problem with the Vimy riding. I am still trying to figure out what is the link of Vimy to the geographic area of that riding. I'm not saying where it is located yet, you still have time to guess.

It is so not obvious why they chose that name, the commission writes it requires an elaborate explanation.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nice history lesson but it fails to explain why put that name in that place, how the name describes the location. It seems it could have been any riding but they chose this one.

The commission probably succumbed to the veterans lobby. If the suggestion was made at a hearing in Montreal, why not name a Montreal riding Vimy instead of one in Laval. Next time you hear Vimy, you are supposed to think of the Laval area of Laval-des-Rapides and Saint-Martin.         

[King of Kensington]

Most of the old names in Montreal seem fine to me, glad they rejected most of the historical figure names.

[Krago]

Quick, someone who isn't just a random American send this to Olivia Chow! I want to feel in some slight way partially responsible for something in Canadian politics.

I just forwarded the Benji Alternative to Olivia via FB.

So King of Kensington, what was their response? was their any idea if Olivia will speak out against the final report at the procedure committee?

Ya, i read that she's "Considering" it... sad, she will be a greatly missed MP. But makes for some fun speculation as to who will run in those three ridings for the NDP now.

The Benji Alternative?  What about the Krago Alternative!

[King of Kensington]

Why is Davenport at 94,000 in "Krago's King alternative"?  I don't think it needed to be changed at all from the first proposal - never understood the fuss about the Winona to Oakwood pocket by Andrew Cash.  

[Krago]

If you're doing requests, why not do a map with 4 skinny ridings? Give them some historical provincialeque names.

I would love to see this! it would be like the 60's-70's all over again!

You people are insatiable!

Skinny Alternative - Federal

Skinny Alternative - Provincial

My riding names are boring, so please rename them to your collective hearts delight.

[Krago]

Why is Davenport at 94,000 in "Krago's King alternative"?  I don't think it needed to be changed at all from the first proposal - never understood the fuss about the Winona to Oakwood pocket by Andrew Cash.  

Check again, Your Majesty.  It is now fixed.