knox final report - victorian electoral commission · 2007-06-04 · knox is one of the most...

Victorian Electoral Commission

FINAL REPORT Electoral Representation Review for the Knox City Council

4 June 2007

Victorian Electoral Commission Page 2

Table of Contents

1 Recommendation 3

2 Background 3

2.1 Legislative basis......................................................................................3 2.2 The VEC and electoral representation reviews...............................................3 2.3 Municipality profile..................................................................................4 2.4 Current electoral structure ........................................................................4

3 Electoral representation review process 4

4 Public involvement 6

4.1 Public information...................................................................................6 4.2 Advertising.............................................................................................6 4.3 Media releases ........................................................................................6 4.4 VEC website ............................................................................................6 4.5 Leaflet ...................................................................................................7 4.6 Helpline .................................................................................................7 4.7 Guide for Submissions ..............................................................................7 4.8 Supplement ............................................................................................7

5 Preliminary Report 7

5.1 Preliminary submissions ...........................................................................7 5.2 VEC research ...........................................................................................9 5.3 Recommended options .............................................................................9

6 Response submissions 9

7 Public hearing 12

8 Findings and recommendation 15

8.1 Number of councillors ............................................................................ 15 8.2 Electoral structure ................................................................................. 16 8.3 Recommendation................................................................................... 24

9 Appendices 25

9.1 Public notices of the electoral representation review .................................. 25 9.2 Media releases ...................................................................................... 27 9.3 Leaflet ................................................................................................. 32 9.4 Guide for Submissions ............................................................................ 33 9.5 Supplement .......................................................................................... 45 9.6 List of persons and groups making submissions.......................................... 46


1 Recommendation The Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) is required under the legislation for the electoral representation review to make a recommendation to the Minister for Local Government as to the number of councillors and the electoral structure that provides fair and equitable representation for the voters of the City of Knox (s.219D Local Government Act 1989).

The VEC recommends that the Knox City Council consist of nine councillors to be elected from nine wards. This structure is similar to the preliminary alternative option, with some boundary adjustments to accommodate projected voter numbers and communities of interest.

This recommended structure is indicated in the map on the back page of this Report.

2 Background 2.1 Legislative basis

The Local Government (Democratic Reform) Act 2003, which amended the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act), was passed by the Parliament in Spring 2003. The amendments included provisions for independent electoral representation reviews of all Victorian councils. In accordance with this new legislation, the Knox City Council received notice pursuant to s.219C of the Act from the Minister for Local Government that an electoral representation review was to be conducted for the City of Knox. The notice appeared in the Victoria Government Gazette on 4 January 2007.

Under the legislation, a council is required to appoint an electoral commission to conduct an electoral representation review. On 24 January 2007, the Knox City Council advised that it had appointed the VEC to conduct the review.

The purpose of an electoral representation review is to recommend an electoral structure that provides fair and equitable representation for the persons who are entitled to vote at a general election of the Council. Matters to be considered by the review are:

a) the number of councillors; b) the electoral structure of the municipality (whether the municipality should

be unsubdivided or divided into wards; and, if the municipality is to be subdivided, the number of wards and the number of councillors to be elected for each ward); and

c) if the recommendation is for the municipality to be divided into wards, boundaries for the wards that will:

i. provide for a fair and equitable division of the municipality; and ii. ensure equality of representation, through the number of voters

represented by each councillor being within 10% of the average number of voters represented by all councillors.

2.2 The VEC and electoral representation reviews

The VEC has ten years’ experience in working on municipal ward boundaries, being contracted by councils to prepare options for their consideration. VEC staff have also worked for the Electoral Boundaries Commission in State redivisions. In doing this work, the VEC has used sophisticated mapping software, conducted field research and


has developed expertise in preparing electoral boundaries that both comply with legislative approximate equality requirements and respect communities of interest.

The VEC has engaged Mr Vern Robson to provide expertise in the field of local government. Mr Robson has worked in local government since 1955, and has been the Town Clerk and Chief Executive Officer of the City of Warrnambool, the Chief Commissioner of the City of Ballarat, the Administrator of the Mansfield Shire Council and the Director of the Local Government Branch of the former Department of Infrastructure.

2.3 Municipality profile

The City of Knox was proclaimed in 1994, and is located in the outer eastern metropolitan area approximately 25kms from the Melbourne GPO. The City includes the suburbs of Ferntree Gully, Upper Ferntree Gully, Boronia, The Basin, Rowville, Wantirna, Wantirna South, Lysterfield, Knoxfield, Scoresby and Bayswater.

Knox is one of the most populous municipalities in Victoria with almost 150,000 residents living in eleven localities. Knox residents are proud of their city’s leafy green image, and are protective of the nearby foothills and other places of biological significance. It is a community with residents from 130 different countries who speak 54 languages.

In only thirty years, housing, business and commercial development has sprung up across the once rural landscape of Knox. There is substantial local employment in business, retail and manufacturing. The main industries include chemical product ion and food manufacturing. Modern industrial estates are focussing on future technologies, and thriving, modern shopping and commercial precincts feature in its suburbs. There is interest in the arts, leisure and recreational pursuits.

The Urban Growth Boundary winds through the northeast and southeast corners of the municipality, and population growth is slowing. By 2015 an estimated 26% of the Knox population will be over 65. These changing demographics are impacting on housing development and services. There is a decrease in new housing subdivisions and an increase in multi-unit developments.

(Sources: Department of Sustainability and Environment Victoria in Future 2004; Department of Sustainability and Environment Melbourne in Fact 2001; Department of Sustainability and Environment Victoria Population Bulletin 2006; Department of Sustainability and Environment Know Your Area; Knox City Council website)

2.4 Current electoral structure

The City of Knox is a subdivided municipality with nine councillors elected from nine wards.

3 Electoral representation review process Section 219D of the Local Government Act 1989 specifies that the purpose of an electoral representation review is to achieve “fair and equitable representation for the persons who are entitled to vote at a general election of the Council.” To achieve this, the VEC proceeds on the basis of three main principles:


1: to ensure that 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 an electoral representation review, the VEC needs to correct any imbalances that have come about. The VEC also tries to make sure that the boundaries it sets will continue to provide equitable representation until the next review is due in eight years, by taking account of likely future changes.

2: to take a consistent, State-wide approach to the total number of councillors

Regarding the number of councillors, the VEC has adopted as a guide the numbers of councillors in similar-sized municipalities of similar categories within Victoria. In addition, the VEC considers any special circumstances that warrant the municipality having more or fewer councillors than similar municipalities.

3: to ensure that communities of interest are as fairly represented as possible

Every municipality contains a number of communities of interest. The electoral structure should be designed to take these into account where practicable. This is important for assisting the elected councillors to be effective representatives of the people in their particular municipality.

The VEC bases its recommendations on a number of factors, including the following:

internal research specifically relating to the municipality under review;

the VEC’s experience from its work with other municipalities and in similar reviews for State elections;

the VEC’s expertise in mapping, demography and local government; and

careful consideration of all input from the public in both written and verbal submissions made during the course of the review.

Input from the public is an important part of the process, but it is not the only factor considered. The VEC seeks to ensure fair and equitable representation for all voters of the municipality. This means carefully considering all views expressed in submissions from the public, and also considering other factors, such as the best possible representation for the various communities of interest in the municipality under review.

In considering public submissions, the VEC values the local knowledge and local perspectives that are presented. The VEC believes it important to consider the issues and information presented in submissions, as well as the arguments for particular structural models. In reaching its recommendations, the VEC seeks to combine the information gathered through public submissions with its own research in order to achieve what it considers to be a fair and equitable result until the next review period. The VEC does not make its recommendations based on a “straw poll” of the number of submissions supporting a particular option.

Further details about issues considered by the VEC can be found in Sections 8.1 and 8.2 of this Report and in the Guide for Submissions (Appendix 9.4).


4 Public involvement 4.1 Public information

The VEC informed the community about the electoral representation review through:

advertising in newspapers; conducting an information session in Wantirna South on 7 March 2007, to

outline the review process and to respond to questions from members of the community; communicating with the City of Knox community through the use of media

releases and the VEC website; developing a leaflet containing information about the review, which was

distributed to households throughout the municipality; publishing all preliminary submissions on the VEC website; establishing a helpline for responding to community questions; distributing a Guide for Submissions; releasing a Supplement to the Guide for Submissions containing an amended

timeline; releasing a Preliminary Report on 17 April 2007 and making the Report

available at the Knox City Council offices, at the VEC office and on the VEC website; publishing all submissions in response to the Preliminary Report on the VEC

website; and conducting a public hearing in Wantirna South on 17 May 2007.

4.2 Advertising

In accordance with s.219F(4) of the Act, the VEC published the following advertisements for the electoral representation review:

a public notice of the review, detailing the process, appeared in the Knox Journal on 20 February 2007, and the Knox Leader on 21 February 2007;

a general advertisement covering several electoral representation reviews, including the City of Knox review, appeared in the Herald Sun and The Age on 7 February 2007; and

a notice that the Preliminary Report had been released appeared in the Knox Journal on 17 April 2007, and the Knox Leader on 18 April 2007.

See Appendix 9.1.

4.3 Media releases

Media releases designed to supplement the paid advertising were distributed to the Knox Journal and the Knox Leader newspapers. See Appendix 9.2.

4.4 VEC website

The VEC used its website to deliver information and to provide transparency in the review process. All preliminary submissions and submissions in response to the Preliminary Report were posted to the website to facilitate public access to this information. The VEC website can be viewed at www.vec.vic.gov.au


4.5 Leaflet

The VEC developed a leaflet containing information about the review. The leaflet was distributed to households throughout the municipality. See appendix 9.3

4.6 Helpline

The VEC established a helpline to assist with public enquiries concerning the electoral representation review process.

4.7 Guide for Submissions

The VEC developed and distributed its Guide for Submissions to help those persons interested in making submissions. A copy of the Guide is attached. See Appendix 9.4.

4.8 Supplement

A supplement to the Guide for Submissions was released to provide information on changes in the Knox City Council electoral representation review timeline. See Appendix 9.5

5 Preliminary Report In conducting electoral representation reviews, the VEC follows an extensive process of deliberation as required by legislation. At the preliminary stage, the VEC considers preliminary submissions along with a wide variety of other information in order to develop a preferred and (in most circumstances) an alternative electoral structure option for the municipality in question. The VEC then makes the options available in its Preliminary Report, to be assessed by the public in response submissions and at the public hearing. Having considered the feedback, the VEC then makes a recommendation.

The VEC followed this process during the Knox City Council review. In accordance with s.219F(6) of the Act, the VEC produced a Preliminary Report containing its preferred and alternative options for the City of Knox. In developing these options, the VEC considered preliminary submissions made by various persons and groups, as well as various other relevant factors.

5.1 Preliminary submissions

The VEC received ten preliminary submissions by the closing time (19 March 2007 – 5.00 pm). One submission was received after the deadline and could not be considered. Submissions were mixed in their view of the most preferred number of councillors. Number of councillors

eight submissions recommended nine councillors (the current number), one recommended twelve, and one made no recommendation regarding the number of councillors. Two alternative suggestions were for eleven councillors;

two submissions recommended retaining the current structure (nine councillors elected from nine wards) and expressed satisfaction with the present arrangements;

five submissions recommended multi member wards;


one submission recommended 12 councillors, noting that Knox councillors have a heavy workload, and noting that the number of residents is 32,000 higher than the number of voters; and

one submission made no comment as to the number of councillors.

Electoral structure: Submissions were divided in their preferred electoral structure: Two submissions recommended retaining the current nine single-councillor ward structure, giving the following reasons in support of their recommendation:

the current structure is effective for the municipality;

the ward numbers, number of voters per councillor and ward deviations are all within acceptable limits;

there is low expected population growth and that growth is projected to be evenly spread across the municipality.;

there is a high councillor workload requiring nine councillors;

there are cost benefits associated with retaining the current structure, including costs related to the holding of elections;

the municipality is largely within average socio economic range and demands from the various communities of interest are not complex;

the current levels of support for the elderly (a large and increasing community of interest) are satisfactory;

the existing ward divisions are suitable for the municipality and its localities; and

the current structure resulted from a recent review process that involved extensive community consultation. [The VEC notes that the commissioners’ recommendation was made prior to the proportional representation vote counting system being introduced for multi-member wards.]

Two submissions recommended a three three-councillor ward structure as a first option and two submissions recommended a three three-councillor ward structure as an alternative.

One submission recommended a four three-councillor ward structure and one recommended a mixed multi-councillor ward structure.

One submission did not specify a structure except to recommend a subdivided structure with at least one green wedge ward.

Submissions recommending multi-councillor ward structures gave reasons including that they:

enable a better reflection of voter preferences;

are more representative of broader range of community views including disadvantaged and community groups; and they

enable a proportional representation vote counting system.


Ward names

Four submissions addressed ward names:

one made suggestions relating to compass or directional names;

two made no suggestions but supported the use of aboriginal names but only in consultation with the indigenous community; and

one recommended continuance of names significant to the municipality.

Several submissions suggested likely boundaries and groupings of existing wards or parts of wards into multi-member wards. Appendix 9.6 contains details of those persons and groups making preliminary submissions. Copies of the submissions can be downloaded from the VEC website, www.vec.vic.gov.au.

5.2 VEC research

In addition to information provided in submissions, the VEC conducted its own research. This included research into the demographics of the municipality, using a number of data sources including the 2001 Census. The VEC also took into account changes predicted by the Department of Sustainability and Environment and the Department of Infrastructure. Summaries of some of this research were published in the Guide for Submissions, the Preliminary Report and in Section 2.3 of this Report.

Development projections based on information presented by the Council were also taken into consideration. Extensive fieldwork was conducted throughout the municipality by the VEC. In addition, the VEC examined the considerations of the City’s Commissioners when they made their electoral structure recommendations in 1996.

5.3 Recommended options

Having considered the issues outlined in the preliminary submissions and all other relevant factors, the VEC proposed two preliminary options for public comment.

The preferred option was:

That the City of Knox consist of nine councillors elected from three three-councillor wards.

The alternative option was:

That the City of Knox consist of nine councillors elected from nine single councillor wards.

6 Response submissions In accordance with s.219F(7) of the Act, the VEC invited written submissions in response to the Preliminary Report. The VEC received 22 submissions by the due date.

Five submissions supported the preliminary preferred option of three three-councillor wards.

Reasons provided in support of the preliminary preferred model included:

the perceived advantages of proportional representation vote counting system;


the preferred option captures communities of interest well;

a broader representation of the community can be obtained by giving special interest groups the opportunity to be elected;

the preferred option gives members of the community choice over which councillor they will approach over a certain issue; and

multi-councillor wards enable strongly held views within a community to impact on one third of the councillors rather than one ninth. Therefore, a greater percentage of the council is accountable for decisions impacting directly on a local community.

These submitters expressed a wide variety of reasons for their opposition to the preferred option including general beliefs about the impact of multi-councillor wards as well as those specific to the City of Knox. These included:

the overall large geographic area of the City of Knox will result in wards that are too large for councillors to service effectively;

the current structure is less than 10 years old and was determined as a result of community consultation;

the Lakewood Estate provides a natural constituency for a single councillor ward and to split it between two or more wards makes little sense;

the number of voters to be serviced by each councillor will be 36000 not 12000;

multi-councillor wards will lead to an increased workload for councillors and will decrease the time available to the council for developing structural and strategic considerations for long-term policies;

having experienced both single-councillor and multi-councillor ward structures, the submitter believes that more candidates stand in single councillor wards whereas in multi-councillor wards more candidates are likely to be re-elected unopposed;

constituents will not know which councillor to contact or how to determine the effectiveness of each councillor in a multi-councillor ward;

pressure groups or single issue groups may dominate a large ward;

councillors will be unable to effectively determine what the voters want, resulting in less representation of local groups and voters not being adequately represented;

concern that all councillors could reside in one pocket of a ward, thus resulting in lack of real representation;

consensus on ward issues will be required between councillors before such issues are taken to council which will take up more time with meetings;

change will be disruptive; and

larger wards will reduce the number of candidates as campaign costs will increase unacceptably in a multi-councillor ward structure;


Sixteen submissions expressed a preference for a single-councillor ward structure, with twelve supporting the current structure and four expressing support for the alternative option.

The four submissions supporting the alternative option gave reasons including:

single-councillor wards are more democratic;

single-councillor ward councillors are more accountable than those from multi-councillor wards

local representation is enabled by a single ward structure

The twelve submissions that expressed a preference for the current nine single-councillor ward structure gave a variety of reasons in addition to those above including:

the existing ward boundaries are satisfactory; current ward deviations are within the legislated ± 10% deviation, and are expected to remain within acceptable limits at least until the next review;

genuine natural local communities are captured by the current structure whereas the preferred option creates large artificial groupings;

the proposed three three-councillor wards do not enhance or create new communities of interest other than those related to socio-economic divisions;

effective local representation is provided by the current structure;

the current structure creates a manageable workload for councillors;

election costs are affordable for candidates;

communities in the City of Knox are working together in harmony, rather than competing in blocks;

the community has confidence in the existing structure and values the intimate knowledge the councillors maintain about their respective local areas;

Knox is geographically large and is better suited to smaller, more practical sized wards;

the current structure provides good representation across the city and effective relationships between constituents and councillors are maintained;

concern that larger wards will reduce the number of candidates because of the increased cost of campaigning;

single-councillor ward representation enables community groups to work through issues in a controlled, effective and systematic manner;

problems occurred under the previous multi-councillor structure;

‘many’ members of the Knox Ratepayers Association have experienced both types of structure in Knox City Council and consider the current single-councillor ward structure to be more effective in addressing the various communities of interest;

a multi-councillor ward structure will mean voters will have to lobby within another level of government;


the current structure provides good representation across geographical areas and in the various suburbs;

the current structure provides greater encouragement for candidates to nominate;

significant minorities are represented and not disadvantaged by the current structure; and

the current structure provides an efficient and effective framework for continuing interaction between local council and local residents;

Submitters commented that those submissions supporting the preferred option are from people or groups located outside the municipality.

Some submissions noted that certain boundaries in the alternative option were unsatisfactory because they split communities of interest inappropriately. Comments included:

the proposed boundaries divide some areas, severing communities of interest. These submissions noted that this is particularly so in the Ferntree Gully foothills, (the proposed Dobson/Chandler ward boundary) also noting that it is recognised by the State Government as a unique area of Knox, and that the community united and lobbied for protection for this area over a 5-year period;

the 3 wards in the preferred option are very artificial in nature: Bushy Park contains three very different suburbs in history and nature; Lightwood suburbs are all very different communities to each other; and Stamford Rowville (west) is very different to the more easterly areas of Rowville and Lysterfield;

the areas of Ferntree Gully around Mountain Gate and Kent Park are different in nature and history to the “Rowvilles” and are separated from them by what was termed the “creek with no crossings”;

in the alternative model, Lakewood housing estate community is inappropriately divided between two wards;

the northern boundary being proposed along Doysal Avenue and Olivebank Road is not a logical boundary; and

the southern boundary should be considered at either Rathgar or Kelletts Road to increase the voter numbers for Taylor Ward.

A list of those persons and groups who made response submissions is provided in Appendix 9.6. Copies of the submissions can be downloaded from the VEC website, www.vec.vic.gov.au

7 Public hearing A public hearing was held at the Knox City Council Function Rooms, Civic Centre, 511 Burwood Highway, Wantirna South, on 17 May 2007 at 6.30pm. All people and groups who had requested to be heard in their submissions in response to the VEC’s Preliminary Report were invited to speak to their submissions, and eight people chose to do so.

One person who had chosen to speak did not attend for the hearing. Members of the public were invited to attend, and there was a total audience of 15 people (including


those making presentations). Speakers raised a number of issues in support of points raised in written submissions.

The Council representative stated that the existing structure is effective and has served the community well. He noted a high rate of participation and candidature, which was indicative of an effective structure. This presenter expressed concern that a change to a multi-councillor ward structure would dilute accountability and reduce the accessibility of councillors to voters.

A matter of concern to that speaker and other speakers was the anticipated increase in campaign costs for candidates due to the larger geographical area, and the increase in the number of voters to be canvassed. It was feared that this would reduce the number of candidates, and that candidates’ volunteer supporters would be over-taxed.

The presenter pointed out the Council’s view that the wards in the preferred model appeared to place a disproportionate emphasis on socio-economic divisions and he asserted that this would not be advantageous to Council operations.

The presenter for the Knox Ratepayers’ Association expressed his organisation’s opposition to changes to boundaries and structure, arguing that all wards in the current structure are within the allowable tolerance of ± 10%. He argued that the introduction of a new structure was unnecessary and would be unworkable because of the large geographic size of the municipality.

This speaker asserted that the consequent increases in time and costs to councillors of servicing a much larger ward and for candidates to canvass the larger wards would be detrimental to the municipality.

This presenter also noted that only one of the submissions in favour of the preferred option was from a Knox City Council resident, asserting that this was indicative of a high level of voter satisfaction with the current electoral structure within the municipality.

A few speakers stated that the preferred option would combine communities that have nothing in common, and that different communities exist within Knox City Council and can be differentiated quite clearly. One speaker cited Scoresby, Wantirna and Wantirna South as examples of adjacent communities that are very different and have differing interests and needs from council. The speaker also identified the localities of Bayswater, Ferntree Gully and The Basin as separate communities that have developed independently and very differently. Other speakers identified differences between Ferntree Gully and The Basin relating them to the positioning of the proposed Dobson/Chandler Ward boundary in the alternative option.

One speaker noted that the proposed Stamford Ward in the preferred model included within its boundaries the “creek with no crossings” (the Corhanwarrabul and Monbulk Creeks) indicating that this would mean councillors in the proposed Stamford ward in the preferred option would have much greater distances to travel in order to visit locations within the ward.

The speaker noted that the western boundary of the proposed Scott Ward in the alternative model inappropriately divided the Lakewood housing estate and suggested that a better boundary would be Scoresby Road or the rear of the properties along Bunnett Road.


Another speaker argued that some submissions in favour of the preferred option were from people who were not residents of the municipality and demonstrated a lack of local knowledge of the area.

This speaker reiterated the statements in her submission relating to an increase to eleven councillors and her view that the large population of the City of Knox and the increase in workloads for councillors related to legislative requirements and administrative work warranted an increase in councillor numbers.

This speaker then indicated her support for the current structure, noting that the communities of interest have developed within the City of Knox over decades. She outlined her concerns that the interests of these separate communities would not be served by the preferred option, as it does not capture the communities of interest well.

One speaker noted the changing demographics of the municipality and stated that communities are currently encouraged to be involved in council decisions. He expressed the views that the City of Knox is unique and that Knox City Council worked very effectively. He expressed his concern that larger wards would lead to a decrease in councillor accountability and argued that smaller wards resulted in increased representation.

This speaker argued that a referendum style vote should be required to effect a change in council structure. [The VEC notes that discussion on the legislation guiding the electoral representation review process is beyond the scope of this review.]

Several speakers presented the view that the proposed boundary between Dobson and Chandler Wards in the alternative option splits Ferntree Gully inappropriately, and that this boundary should be moved north. These speakers noted the individual character of the Ferntree Gully foothills area and asserted that the significance of the area militates against both splitting it as in the alternative option, and combining it with The Basin, Boronia and Bayswater as in the preferred option. Two speakers specifically asserted that there was very little connection between Ferntree Gully and The Basin.

Another speaker conceded that the Dobson Ward could be extended to Boronia Road but noted that the character of the localities changed around this area.

A significant number of speakers asserted that the voter number projections put forward by the VEC were inaccurate, especially in the short term, and that they did not reflect the municipality’s low expected population growth.

The presenter representing the Knox Greens supported the preferred option noting that it would give special interest groups the opportunity for better representation. This presenter also asserted that it would provide voters with a choice of representatives to approach over issues, and that councillors would be more informed about specific issues. This presenter stated that his organisation supported an odd number of councillors and that nine councillors would be cost-effective for the municipality.

In relation to assertions by other speakers that the preferred model would increase costs to an unacceptable level, this speaker responded that candidates who had the strength of support required to be elected should be able to generate sufficient support to mount an election campaign.


8 Findings and recommendation The Act states that the purpose of the electoral representation review is to consider two matters. The first matter is the number of councillors for the municipality and the second matter is the electoral structure of the municipality.

8.1 Number of councillors

Issues considered by the VEC

The legislation provides that a council must consist of between 5 and 12 councillors (s.5B(1)). It does not, however, prescribe the matters to be considered by the reviewer in recommending the number of councillors for a municipality.

The VEC has therefore been required to identify the appropriate matters to take into account when considering the number of councillors.

In terms of voter numbers, Victorian municipalities vary from approximately 4,000 to over 164,000. The VEC applies the legislative provisions relating to numbers of councillors in a logical way, with those councils that have the largest number of voters having the most councillors, and those councils that have the least number of voters having the fewest councillors.

The VEC also considers whether the number of voters in the municipality is anticipated to increase or decline in the period between reviews (approximately eight years). Population forecasts produced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment have been used to assist the VEC in making its assessment.

In addition, the VEC considers any special issues or circumstances that may require a council to have more or fewer councillors than would otherwise be the case. Public submissions provide valuable information regarding any such issues or circumstances.

The VEC’s findings

The VEC’s preliminary options

In its Preliminary Report, the VEC found nine to be the most appropriate number of councillors for the Knox City Council.

As noted in the Preliminary Report, Knox City Council has voter numbers around 109,000 and a large population, though the expected growth rate for the next eight years is low (2.19%). In addition, Knox City covers a large area, so the VEC believed it was reasonable to consider a councillor number between nine and eleven.

Some preliminary submissions recommended nine councillors, arguing that

the number of voters per councillor would be within an acceptable range when compared to other municipalities; councillor workload is expected to remain stable; an increase in numbers would be accompanied by a cost increase with no

additional community benefit; One submission noted that the councillor workload is onerous, whilst another noted that whilst councillor workload is high, an increase in councillor numbers would increase costs and would not necessarily reduce the workloads of individual councillors.


The VEC has recommended eleven councillors for municipalities of a similar size or population to the City of Knox. The VEC considers, however, that these municipalities can be distinguished from the City of Knox because they generally have more diverse or distinct communities of interest and projected increases in population growth. Consequently these municipalities have higher levels of disadvantage and/or more complex needs than those in the City of Knox, thereby placing a greater workload on councillors.

The options are tested

There were no significant objections put forward in response submissions or by presenters at the public hearing to the recommendation of nine councillors as the appropriate number of councillors for Knox City Council.

One submission in response to the Preliminary Report stated support for an increase to eleven councillors. This submitter stated at the public hearing that some good reasons existed for an increase in councillor numbers as noted above. Since an eleven-councillor option had not been put forward in the Preliminary Report, the speaker then indicated support for the retention of the current structure.

As noted in its Preliminary Report, at the preliminary stage of the review the VEC did consider the option of increasing the number of councillors. The VEC believes that the special circumstances required to support a recommendation for eleven councillors are not apparent within the City of Knox.

Consequently, the VEC sees no reason to change its original finding. The VEC confirms its view that nine is the number of councillors most likely to provide the opportunity for fair and equitable representation to the voters of Knox City.

8.2 Electoral structure

Issues considered by the VEC

Provisions within the Act allow for a municipality to be unsubdivided, with all councillors elected “at large” by all voters, or for a municipality to be subdivided into a number of wards. If wards have only one councillor, councillors are elected using preferential voting. Under an unsubdivided or a multi-councillor ward structure, councillors are elected through proportional representation. With each system, voters mark their ballot papers the same way.

If the municipality is subdivided into wards, there are three options available:

single-councillor wards; multi-councillor wards; and a combination of both single-councillor and multi-councillor wards.

Boundaries for wards must:

provide for a fair and equitable division of the municipality; and 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 addition to the legislative requirements, a number of other factors were considered when evaluating subdivided structures. These factors included:

communities of interest (Communities of interest are groups of people who share a range of common concerns. They may occur where people are linked with each other geographically, economically or through having particular needs.); spreading developing areas over a number of wards; using logical boundaries such as main roads, physical features and existing

boundaries for easy identification of wards; and taking account of likely population changes.

In developing ward boundaries, the VEC aims to achieve the best possible balance between these criteria.

The VEC’s findings

Should the municipality be unsubdivided?

The VEC’s process of determining an appropriate electoral structure for the Knox City Council began with an assessment of the City and of the existing structure of nine councillors elected from nine single-councillor wards.

The VEC recognises that there are distinct communities of interest within the municipality. The City of Knox covers established residential areas, newer residential areas and green wedge areas. Whilst it has been identified as a reasonably homogeneous community, there are differences in the demographic profile across the municipality, as well as notable geographic differences.

Population growth in the City of Knox is expected to occur evenly across the municipality in the years to 2016 at a comparatively low rate of 2.19%, although there is some conjecture relating to anticipated pockets of development in the existing Scott and Dinsdale Wards.

In preparing its summary for the Preliminary Report, the VEC noted that the trends in the north and north-east of the municipality do not in general extend to The Basin.

Variations in population density are evident across the municipality and significantly higher numbers of families with children under 15 are evident in Lysterfield and Rowville. Slightly higher numbers of people aged over 65 years live in the north of the municipality, with the highest percentages occurring in Upper Ferntree Gully.

The number of people born overseas is higher in Wantirna, Wantirna South, Rowville, and Bayswater. A wide variety of countries of origin is evident in these areas, and there are smaller groups of people born in the United Kingdom who have settled in The Basin, Upper Ferntree Gully, Boronia, Ferntree Gully and Bayswater.

Households with incomes in the lowest quartile are more common in the north-east areas of Bayswater, Boronia, Upper Ferntree Gully and Ferntree Gully. Single parent families are found in higher proportions in Boronia, Bayswater, Scoresby and Ferntree Gully along with a higher proportion of government housing. Unemployment is higher in the north-east but these figures are lower than the Melbourne metropolitan average.

The differences between geographic areas and between groups within the municipality mean that there are a number of communities within the municipality that have varying interests and differing needs from the Council. The VEC therefore


considers that the opportunity for fair and equitable representation is more likely to be achieved by dividing the municipality into wards.

The VEC also noted that the City contains nearly 109,000 voters. An unsubdivided municipality would be a very large electorate for candidates to canvass, and could result in an impractically large number of candidates listed on ballot papers. At the 2005 election there was a total of 44 candidates across all wards. If all of those candidates were to stand for election in an unsubdivided municipality, all 44 would appear on the one ballot paper and voters would have to number each box with a preference from 1 to 44 (unlike voting for the Senate, voters cannot have the option of voting above the line in local government elections).

Given these considerations, the VEC believes that it is most appropriate to divide the City of Knox into wards.

The VEC’s preliminary options

Preliminary submissions received by the VEC indicated that the existing nine single-councillor ward structure enjoys support from the community, though a number of submissions supported the introduction of multi-councillor wards to help ensure that minority groups and non-geographic communities of interest were afforded the opportunity for fair and equitable representation.

Census data suggested that there are broader communities of interest than were captured by the single-councillor wards in the existing structure. In the VEC’s view, whilst the existing electoral structure reflected localities reasonably well, the nine smaller wards did not necessarily reflect non-geographic communities of interest or encourage broader representation for voters.

The VEC was concerned that unlike larger wards, which are able to gather together broad groupings of people linked by features such as ethnicity or language, small wards with limited geographic reach are less likely to incorporate enough members of any single minority group to make representation feasible.

As was argued in submissions supporting multi-ward structures, the VEC considered that representation of non-geographic communities of interest, including cultural, familial and socio-economic communities, would be assisted by the introduction of a system of voting by proportional representation.

As a result of its research, and the arguments and evidence presented in preliminary submissions, the VEC developed its preferred option, consisting of a three three-councillor ward electoral structure.

However, the VEC did identify some problems when dividing the municipality into three larger wards due to the distribution of the population, geographic features and the size and shape of the various localities within the City of Knox.

It was not possible to simply merge the existing wards into groups of three, as was suggested in preliminary submissions, as this resulted in awkwardly shaped wards with unclear boundaries and unacceptable deviations in average voter numbers.

The VEC endeavours to create boundaries so that the number of voters per ward will remain within the legislated tolerance for as long as possible and, as part of the review, considers the likelihood of changes within the various localities.

Significant factors including area and physical terrain; means of travel; traffic arteries and community connections; expected population growth; changes in voter numbers;


and communities and diversities of interest assist in forming decisions relating to the electoral structure and the creation of ward boundaries.

The VEC develops projections by combining data obtained from a variety of sources. One of the reasons supporting the VEC’s recommendation of a three three-councillor ward structure with the specific boundaries indicated in the preliminary preferred option was that it considered this structure would better contain some uneven growth expected in pockets within the municipality. Wards would therefore be more likely to remain within the legislated tolerance for the period between reviews.

In developing the preliminary options, the VEC also considered arguments in support of retaining the current single-councillor ward structure.

There was some evidence identified in research, from data and in preliminary submissions that there were a number of compact, geographic communities of interest in the municipality.

Substantial differences between The Basin and the Boronia and Bayswater areas, and between Ferntree Gully and the Rowville and Lysterfield areas were noted. The Basin and the Ferntree Gully/Dandenong foothills were considered to indicate locality-based communities of interest that could perhaps be more effectively represented in a single-councillor ward structure than in a multi-councillor ward structure.

The Knox City Council submission argued that the current structure best represents the communities of interest across the municipality. The Council stated that low growth is expected, and the existing boundaries have remained within the legislated ±10% tolerance for six years. The Council stated that it does not expect current wards to move outside that tolerance within the next eight years.

In response to the VEC’s concerns relating to the voter numbers in individual wards in the single-councillor ward structure, several speakers commented that the projections used by the VEC did not correspond with those put forward by the Knox City Council. This issue was significant because if wards are outside the legislated tolerance before the next election a further review may be required.

The Council stated that to its knowledge there are no significant issues related to cultural and linguistic diversity in the municipality.

The Council also stated that the aged population is well supported by retirement villages and existing services, unemployment in the municipality is low and individual incomes are largely within the average for metropolitan Melbourne.

In making its assessment for the purposes of its Preliminary Report, the VEC considered whether the current structure adequately captured the various communities of interests.

The VEC considered locality-based communities such as The Basin and Ferntree Gully, discussed above, were clearly identified as geographically determined. Large parts of the municipality, though, appeared to be more suited to a multi-councillor ward structure. On balance, the VEC believed the locality-based communities of interest, which had been identified at that stage, could be well represented in either a single-councillor ward structure or a multi-councillor ward structure.

After considering the arguments and conducting research, the VEC included a nine single-councillor ward structure as an option in the Preliminary Report. The existing, similar single-councillor ward structure enjoys support from the community and the


VEC considered it was appropriate to present such a structure for consideration by the community.

The VEC did so notwithstanding some concern that planned development in the municipality could put pressure on the balance of voter numbers between wards.

The wards under the VEC’s preliminary alternative option were drawn so that the existing ward boundaries could be retained as far as was possible, though a number of adjustments had to be made to allow for expected population growth based on available data at the time of modelling.

When comparing the two options, the VEC decided to recommend the three three-councillor ward structure as its preliminary preferred option. The VEC considered that the non-geographic communities of interest identified within the municipality were captured more effectively by the preferred option than was achieved by the preliminary alternative option of nine single councillor wards, and that the three three-councillor ward structure would better contain the pockets of anticipated growth within the legislated tolerance.

The options are tested

Legislation provides that, in conducting an electoral representation review, the VEC must put forward its initial preferred option and any alternative options in a Preliminary Report. The VEC must also invite written submissions on the Report and it must hear verbal presentations if any person making a submission so requests. In effect, the Preliminary Report provides the VEC with an opportunity to test its preliminary options before formulating a final recommendation for the Minister to consider. Similarly, written and verbal responses to the Report operate either to affirm or deny the appropriateness of the electoral models suggested by the VEC.

One of the VEC’s primary considerations when conducting electoral representation reviews is to recommend a structure that enables voters to elect a council that will represent their views, interests and needs.

A number of issues were raised by a number of submitters concerning both the preliminary preferred and the preliminary alternative options.

At the public hearing, speakers provided argument relating to the different characteristics of communities in adjacent localities such as Boronia and The Basin, which the VEC had identified previously and are discussed above.

The Councillor for Scott Ward also noted differences between the communities of Wantirna and Wantirna South, and between Bayswater and Boronia. Speakers argued that the VEC’s preferred option inappropriately combined communities of interest and localities. Speakers also identified boundaries in the preferred option that inappropriately split some communities.

In its research the VEC had identified The Basin as an area of significant difference to adjacent areas both demographically and geographically. In the VEC’s preferred option The Basin was grouped with adjacent areas in a three-councillor ward structure. The VEC considered that grouping the communities in this way would have provided sufficient opportunity for representation for communities of interest within the proposed Lightwood Ward. This was particularly so given the shared green wedge interest that extended into the Ferntree Gully area that was also contained within the proposed Lightwood Ward.


The VEC considered that the proposed Bushy Park and Stamford Wards in its preliminary preferred option grouped non-geographic communities of interest more effectively than shown in the single councillor wards in the alternative option, particularly across the south and central west of the municipality.

However, response submissions and speakers at the public hearing identified a number of communities of interest across the municipality that were distinct from each other geographically and in character, lifestyle and land use. A number of proposed boundaries that split existing communities were also identified in each option.

The creeks that wind through the proposed Stamford Ward in the preferred option were identified as problematic due to the lack of creek crossings. The VEC notes that the creeks run through three of the existing wards and that for the most part, the available crossings are located in the more densely populated parts in the east of the municipality.

Concerns relating to the preferred option indicated a combination of perceived problems about multi-councillor wards in general and, more specifically, about the unsuitability of a multi-councillor ward structure for Knox City Council.

There were some concerns that a multi-councillor ward structure with larger wards and high number of voters per councillor would cause campaign costs to become prohibitive for candidates. The VEC does not consider that the risk of an increase in campaign costs is a principal reason to recommend single-councillor wards.

Submissions and presentations at the public hearing contained general arguments in support of single-councillor ward structures. Argument focusing on the perceived benefits of single-councillor wards included increased councillor accountability, and the effectiveness of relationships between voters and councillors as was experienced in the current structure.

Notwithstanding the recommendation contained in this report, the VEC notes that multi-councillor wards can and do function successfully without many of these perceived concerns eventuating, and that a single-councillor ward structure may not necessarily resolve the doubts expressed about multi-councillor wards structures. Issues such as councillors avoiding responsibility and the involvement of parties and tickets may occur under any electoral structure.

A single-councillor ward structure may be considered the most suitable for a particular municipality due to a range of circumstances and for a variety of reasons. The representation of communities of interest that are predominantly geographic and can be well captured in a single-councillor structure must be balanced with the need for representation for non-geographic diversities and communities of interest.

It was argued in submissions and at the public hearing that the City of Knox community is relatively homogeneous, and that their differences and the requirements they have of the Council are related to their geographic community rather than their ethnicity, socio-economic status or diversity of lifestyle and interests.

It was also pointed out that the Council has a capacity building and place management approach that is based around the various villages and commercial hubs in the localities throughout the municipality, and that this approach is supported by the single-councillor ward structure and has not been divisive for residents.


Submitters pointed out that what is important in the City of Knox is to have wards that reflect existing geographic communities of interest in preference to a structure that reflects non-geographic community groups.

It was argued that the homogeneousness of the community as a whole meant that geographic communities of interest had more varying needs and interests than the non-geographic communities that had been otherwise identified in research and in submissions.

The special significance of the Ferntree Gully area was noted. The extent of this community of interest was outlined and it was pointed out by several speakers that the proposed boundary between Chandler and Dobson Wards in the VEC’s alternative option (Olivebank Road and Doysal Avenue) would detrimentally split this long established community of interest.

Summary

The City of Knox contains a relatively large area when compared to other metropolitan municipalities. With around 109,000 voters, the current nine-councillor structure results in an average of around 12,000 voters per councillor, which is high when compared to other municipalities with a similar number of voters.

The nature of the community is such that whilst broad demographic groupings can be observed, at this stage they do not place overwhelming or complex demands on council resources.

The VEC expects that the low expected population growth may result in other fast growing municipalities equalling or even overtaking Knox City Council in terms of the average number of voters per councillor in the future. Therefore, the VEC considers that nine is an appropriate number of councillors for the provision of fair and equitable representation for the voters of the City of Knox.

Information in submissions, and at the public hearing, identified the nature of the City of Knox as being comprised of distinct communities that have developed independently and at different periods. It was noted that these communities have well established and clearly differentiated identities. This characteristic differentiates it from some other metropolitan municipalities that have only three or four major suburban centres, or with communities that developed quite quickly and/or during the same period.

In response to arguments put forward in response submissions and at the public hearing, the VEC conducted extensive modelling using all available data. The VEC calculated projections for the City of Knox using a number of variables relating to anticipated housing development and population projections for localities within the City of Knox, including updated data provided by the Council.

The modelling under these projections indicated that there remained a likelihood that some wards in the current structure may be outside the allowable tolerance of ± 10% within the next eight years.

The VEC amended boundaries in both the preliminary preferred and the preliminary alternative option in an endeavour to develop a model that effectively captured communities of interest as identified in response submissions and at the public hearing.


Noting the concerns relating to the separation of communities and the inconvenience to councillors caused by the creeks in the southern part of the municipality, the VEC modelled several combinations of nine-councillor, multi-councillor ward options including one with a two-councillor ward in the south of the municipality.

The boundaries in the preliminary preferred option are considered to be the most appropriate to be used if considering a three three-councillor ward structure. The VEC acknowledges that due to the constraints associated with creating logical and clear boundaries in combination with voter distribution, geographical barriers and the characteristics of the communities of interest, some communities are necessarily split in this option, whilst others are combined.

The updated projections indicated that it is more likely than not that the adjusted wards in the preliminary alternative option will comply with legislative requirements for the number of voters in each ward, after allowing for eight years of potential growth in the municipality.

Additionally, as noted above, the VEC believes that a structure consisting of nine single-councillor wards could address the special requirements associated with those voters who reside in the unique sections of the municipality in The Basin, the Dandenong foothills and the Ferntree Gully areas.

The other localities within the municipality, whilst sharing some non-geographic communities of interest as identified in research, also appear to have strong individual identities. The geography and size of the municipality also causes a certain level of isolation or separation between localities. Differences in lifestyle and land use are also apparent and influence the nature of the communities of interest. This view was supported by argument in submissions and at the public hearing.

In other municipalities the VEC has heard convincing argument based around the concept that there is a pressing need for increased diversity on council. This important consideration for voters was not identified, during this review process, as an overriding cause for concern in the City of Knox.

After considering all arguments and evidence in support of, and against both preliminary options, the VEC decided that on balance a nine single-councillor ward structure remains the best-suited option for the City of Knox.

The VEC is satisfied that the non-geographic communities of interest could be well served under a nine single-councillor ward structure based on the existing structure.

Suggested amendments to the single councillor ward boundaries have been accommodated where practicable, although it was not possible to retain the existing ward boundaries. However, to a large extent the current ward structure with appropriate modifications, can be successfully continued.

The Dobson Ward boundary has been redrawn to include much of the remainder of Ferntree Gully. The Taylor Ward boundary has been amended to include the south-west section of the municipality incorporating that part of Lysterfield that relates geographically to Rowville.

The Tirhatuan Ward encompasses the area known as the Austral Bricks Site. The boundary between Dinsdale and Baird Wards has been amended to continue north up Scoresby Road rather than proceeding east at Power Road.


With respect to ward names, the VEC considered comments made in submissions suggesting directional or compass names, historic, Indigenous or locally significant names or existing ward names. The Knox City Council supported the use of existing ward names, reasoning that this decision would be less confusing to voters. The VEC received strong support for the retention of the existing ward names and only qualified support for those ward names in the preferred option.

The VEC agrees that using existing ward names coupled with the continuation of the current electoral structure will be less confusing for voters. The VEC considers the existing ward names to be significant, linked appropriately to the respective ward area and providing continuity of history within the municipality.

The VEC considers that the existing ward names as put forward in the alternative option should be used:

Collier Dinsdale Baird Chandler Scott Friberg Dobson Tirhatuan Taylor

In conclusion, the VEC considers that an electoral structure with nine single-councillor wards will provide the best balance between the various criteria it considers for the electoral representation review.

The VEC is satisfied that this structure will best provide fair and equitable electoral representation to the voters of Knox City Council.

8.3 Recommendation

Having taken into account all relevant factors, including the submissions and presentations at the public hearing, the VEC recommends that the City of Knox consist of nine councillors to be elected from nine single-councillor wards.

This structure is similar to the preliminary alternative option, with some boundary adjustments to accommodate projected voter numbers and communities of interest.

Steve Tully

Electoral Commissioner


9 Appendices 9.1 Public notices of the electoral representation review


Electoral Representation ReviewKnox City Council

The Minister for Local Government has given notice under section 219C of the Local Government Act 1989 that there is to be an electoral representation review of the Knox City Council. The Council has appointed the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) to conduct the independent review.

What is the review about?The aim of the review is to ensure fair and equitable electoral representation for voters in the City of Knox. The VEC will recommend to the Minister for Local Government:

• the appropriate number of councillors;

• whether the City should be unsubdivided or divided into wards; and

• if the City is to be divided into wards, how many wards there should be, the number of councillors per ward and the ward boundaries.

What will the VEC consider?The VEC will consider the numbers of councillors and the electoral structures of comparable municipalities, communities of interest, demographics and growth potential. Arguments and information in public submissions will assist the review.

Any person or group may make a written submission to the VEC regarding electoral representation for the City of Knox. The VEC recommends consulting its Guide for Submissions fi rst.

Key Steps in the ReviewStep 1 – Information session, Wednesday, 7 March – 7.30 pm

• Function Rooms, Civic Centre, 511 Burwood Highway, Wantirna South

Step 2 – Preliminary submissions. Deadline: Monday, 19 March 2007 - 5.00 pm

Step 3 – Preliminary Report, released Tuesday, 10 April 2007

Step 4 – Response submissions. Deadline: Wednesday, 2 May 2007 - 5.00 pm

Step 5 – Public hearing, Thursday, 10 May 2007 - 6.30 pm


• People may speak in support of their response submissions if they have requested to do so in those submissions.

Step 6 – Final Report, released Monday, 28 May 2007

• The VEC will lodge a Final Report, containing its recommendations, with the Minister for Local Government.

For a Guide for Submissions or further information, call 13 18 32 or visit www.vec.vic.gov.



Electoral Representation Reviews

• Manningham City Council

• Whitehorse City Council

• Darebin City Council

• Banyule City Council

The Minister for Local Government has given notice under section 219C of the Local Government Act 1989 that there are to be electoral representation reviews of the following councils:

The councils have appointed the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) to conduct the reviews.

What are the reviews about?The aim of the reviews is to ensure fair and equitable electoral representation for the voters of these municipalities. For each municipality, the VEC will recommend to the Minister for Local Government:


• whether the municipality should be unsubdivided or divided into wards; and

• if the municipality is to be divided into wards, how many wards there should be, the number of councillors per ward and the ward boundaries.

Under an unsubdivided or a multi-councillor ward structure, councillors are elected through proportional representation. Under a single-councillor ward structure, councillors are elected using preferential voting. With each system, voters mark their ballot papers in the same way.

What will the VEC consider?The VEC will consider the numbers of councillors and the electoral structures of comparable municipalities, communities of interest, demographics and growth potential. Arguments and information in public submissions will assist the review.

Any person or group may make a written submission to the VEC regarding electoral representation for these municipalities. The VEC recommends consulting its Guide for Submissions fi rst.

Making a submissionFurther information about making a submission can be found in the Guide for Submissions. Submissions can be made by mail, fax or email. Submissions must reach the VEC by 5.00 pm on the following dates:

• Kingston City Council

• Knox City Council

• Bayside City Council

• Manningham City Council

• Whitehorse City Council

• Darebin City Council

• Banyule City Council

• Kingston City Council

• Knox City Council

• Bayside City Council

5 March 2007

6 March 2007

13 March 2007

13 March 2007

19 March 2007

19 March 2007

19 March 2007

For a Guide for Submissions or further information, call 13 18 32 or visit www.vec.vic.gov.au


9.2 Media releases

Media Release

Page 1 of 2

For release from 20 February 2007

REPRESENTATION REVIEW GETS UNDERWAY

The electoral representation review for the Knox City Council has begun. The review, conducted by the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC), will consider the number of councillors for the municipality and the municipality’s electoral structure. “Anyone interested in the review should attend the public information session on Wednesday, 7 March,” said the Victorian Electoral Commissioner, Mr Steve Tully. The details for the information session are:

Wednesday, 7 March 2007, 7:30 pm Function Rooms, Civic Centre, 511 Burwood Highway, Wantirna South

In conducting its review, the VEC will consider a range of information including arguments and evidence in public submissions. Any person or group may make a written submission to the VEC about the review. Submissions do not have to be elaborate documents. A letter is perfectly acceptable, as long as it deals with the matters covered by the review. The VEC recommends consulting its Guide for Submissions, which outlines the issues involved. Key dates for the City of Knox representation review are: Monday, 19 March 2007 - 5.00 pm –Deadline for preliminary submissions. Submissions can be mailed, faxed or emailed to the VEC. Tuesday, 10 April 2007– The VEC’s Preliminary Report will be released containing its preferred options. Wednesday, 2 May 2007 - 5.00 pm – Deadline for response submissions about the Preliminary Report. Thursday, 10 May 2007 - 6.30 pm – Public hearing. People will be able to speak in support of their response submissions if they have requested to do so in those submissions. Monday, 28 May 2007– The VEC will lodge its Final Report with the Minister for Local Government. Any new electoral arrangements resulting from the review process would apply at the next Council election. For more information, telephone the VEC on 13 18 32 or visit the VEC website www.vec.vic.gov.au

– ENDS –

Media releases are available from the VEC website http://www.vec.vic.gov.au/rrreleases.html

For further media information:

Aileen Duke Victorian Electoral Commission Tel: 9299 0796


Media Fact Sheet

Page 2 of 2

City of Knox The map below shows the current ward boundaries and the voter numbers and deviations from the average number of voters per councillor as at 8 January 2007.


Media Release

Page 1 of 1

For release from Tuesday, 10 April 2007 KNOX CITY COUNCIL ELECTORAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW: PRELIMINARY REPORT DELAY

The Victorian Electoral Commission’s (VEC’s) Preliminary Report on the electoral representation for the Knox City Council has been delayed by one week. It was previously advertised as being released on 10 April 2007. As a result of the delay, all subsequent dates in the electoral representation review process have also been moved by one week. The new timelines for the review are: 17 April 2007 – The VEC’s Preliminary Report will be released containing its preferred options. 9 May 2007– 5.00 pm – Deadline for response submissions about the Preliminary Report. 17 May 2007 – Public hearing. People will be able to speak in support of their response submissions if they have requested to do so in those submissions. 4 June 2007 – The VEC will lodge its Final Report with the Minister for Local Government. Any person who requires additional information can visit www.vec.vic.gov.au, contact the VEC on 13 18 32, or write to the VEC at Level 8, 505 Little Collins Street, Melbourne, Vic. 3000.

– ENDS –





Media Release

Page 1 of 2

For release from Tuesday, 17 April 2007 KNOX CITY COUNCIL ELECTORAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW: PRELIMINARY REPORT RELEASED

The Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) today released its Preliminary Report on electoral representation for the Knox City Council. The VEC’s preliminary preferred option is for the City of Knox to consist of nine councillors, elected from three three-councillor wards. A preliminary alternative option is also included in the Preliminary Report. The Report has been released and is available on the VEC’s web site at www.vec.vic.gov.au . The Report is also available at the Knox City Council offices, 511 Burwood Highway, Wantirna South, and at the VEC office, Level 8, 505 Little Collins Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000. People have until 5.00 pm, Wednesday, 9 May 2007 to lodge submissions with the VEC regarding its Preliminary Report. People who wish to speak publicly in support of their submissions will have an opportunity to do so at a public hearing at: Knox City Council Function Rooms, Civic Centre, 511 Burwood Highway, Wantirna South on Thursday, 17 May 2007 at 6.30 pm. The VEC’s Final Report and recommendations will be lodged with the Minister for Local Government on Monday, 4 June 2007. Please note that these dates are different to those published previously. Any person who requires additional information can visit www.vec.vic.gov.au, contact the VEC on 13 18 32, or write to the VEC at Level 8, 505 Little Collins Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000.

– ENDS –





Media Fact Sheet

Page 2 of 2

MAPS OF RECOMMENDED OPTIONS FOR KNOX CITY COUNCIL

PRELIMINARY PREFERRED OPTION:

Nine councillors elected from three three-councillor wards

Stamford WardStamford WardStamford WardStamford WardStamford WardStamford WardStamford WardStamford WardStamford WardCouncillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3

Lightwood WardLightwood WardLightwood WardLightwood WardLightwood WardLightwood WardLightwood WardLightwood WardLightwood WardCouncillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3

Bushy Park WardBushy Park WardBushy Park WardBushy Park WardBushy Park WardBushy Park WardBushy Park WardBushy Park WardBushy Park WardCouncillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3Councillors: 3

SCORESBY

KNOXFIELD

WANTIRNA SOUTH

THE BASIN

FERNTREE GULLY

UPPERFERNTREE

GULLY

BAYSWATER

BORONIA

WANTIRNA

LYSTERFIELDROWVILLE

PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE OPTION: Nine councillors elected from nine single-councillor wards

Friberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardCouncil lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Counc il lors : 1Counc il lors : 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Counc il lors : 1

T irhatuan WardT irhatuan WardT irhatuan WardT irhatuan WardT irhatuan WardT irhatuan WardT irhatuan WardT irhatuan WardT irhatuan WardCouncil lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Counc il lors : 1Counc il lors : 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Counc il lors : 1

T aylor WardT aylor WardT aylor WardT aylor WardT aylor WardT aylor WardT aylor WardT aylor WardT aylor WardCouncil lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Counc il lors: 1Counc il lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Counc il lors: 1

Scott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardCounc il lors : 1Counc il lors : 1Counc il lors : 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Counc il lors : 1Counc il lors : 1Counc il lors : 1Council lors: 1

Dobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardCouncil lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Counc il lors : 1Counc il lors : 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Counc il lors : 1

Dinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardCounc il lors : 1Counc il lors : 1Counc il lors : 1Council lors : 1Council lors : 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors : 1

Chandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardCounc il lors: 1Counc il lors: 1Counc il lors: 1Council lors : 1Council lors : 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors : 1

Baird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardCounc il lors: 1Counc il lors: 1Counc il lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Counc il lors: 1Counc il lors: 1Counc il lors: 1Council lors: 1

Coll ier WardColl ier WardColl ier WardColl ier WardColl ier WardColl ier WardColl ier WardColl ier WardColl ier WardCounc il lors: 1Counc il lors: 1Counc il lors: 1Council lors : 1Council lors : 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors: 1Council lors : 1

UPPERFERNTREE

GULLY

FERNTREE GULLY

SCORESBY

ROWVILLE

BORONIA

LYSTERFIELD

WANTIRNA SOUTH

WANTIRNA

BAYSWATER


9.3 Leaflet

BAIRD WARDBAIRD WARDBAIRD WARDBAIRD WARDBAIRD WARDBAIRD WARDBAIRD WARDBAIRD WARDBAIRD WARDCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Total Voters: 11,315Total Voters: 11,315Total Voters: 11,315Total Voters: 11,315Total Voters: 11,315Total Voters: 11,315Total Voters: 11,315Total Voters: 11,315Total Voters: 11,315Deviation: -6.33%Deviation: -6.33%Deviation: -6.33%Deviation: -6.33%Deviation: -6.33%Deviation: -6.33%Deviation: -6.33%Deviation: -6.33%Deviation: -6.33%

TAYLOR WARDTAYLOR WARDTAYLOR WARDTAYLOR WARDTAYLOR WARDTAYLOR WARDTAYLOR WARDTAYLOR WARDTAYLOR WARDCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Total Voters: 13,195Total Voters: 13,195Total Voters: 13,195Total Voters: 13,195Total Voters: 13,195Total Voters: 13,195Total Voters: 13,195Total Voters: 13,195Total Voters: 13,195Deviation: +9.23%Deviation: +9.23%Deviation: +9.23%Deviation: +9.23%Deviation: +9.23%Deviation: +9.23%Deviation: +9.23%Deviation: +9.23%Deviation: +9.23%

DOBSON WARDDOBSON WARDDOBSON WARDDOBSON WARDDOBSON WARDDOBSON WARDDOBSON WARDDOBSON WARDDOBSON WARDCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Total Voters: 12,381Total Voters: 12,381Total Voters: 12,381Total Voters: 12,381Total Voters: 12,381Total Voters: 12,381Total Voters: 12,381Total Voters: 12,381Total Voters: 12,381Deviation: +2.50%Deviation: +2.50%Deviation: +2.50%Deviation: +2.50%Deviation: +2.50%Deviation: +2.50%Deviation: +2.50%Deviation: +2.50%Deviation: +2.50%

FRIBERG WARDFRIBERG WARDFRIBERG WARDFRIBERG WARDFRIBERG WARDFRIBERG WARDFRIBERG WARDFRIBERG WARDFRIBERG WARDCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Total Voters: 12,516Total Voters: 12,516Total Voters: 12,516Total Voters: 12,516Total Voters: 12,516Total Voters: 12,516Total Voters: 12,516Total Voters: 12,516Total Voters: 12,516Deviation: +3.61%Deviation: +3.61%Deviation: +3.61%Deviation: +3.61%Deviation: +3.61%Deviation: +3.61%Deviation: +3.61%Deviation: +3.61%Deviation: +3.61%

CHANDLER WARDCHANDLER WARDCHANDLER WARDCHANDLER WARDCHANDLER WARDCHANDLER WARDCHANDLER WARDCHANDLER WARDCHANDLER WARDCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Total Voters: 11,472Total Voters: 11,472Total Voters: 11,472Total Voters: 11,472Total Voters: 11,472Total Voters: 11,472Total Voters: 11,472Total Voters: 11,472Total Voters: 11,472Deviation: -5.03%Deviation: -5.03%Deviation: -5.03%Deviation: -5.03%Deviation: -5.03%Deviation: -5.03%Deviation: -5.03%Deviation: -5.03%Deviation: -5.03%

TIRHATUAN WARDTIRHATUAN WARDTIRHATUAN WARDTIRHATUAN WARDTIRHATUAN WARDTIRHATUAN WARDTIRHATUAN WARDTIRHATUAN WARDTIRHATUAN WARDCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Total Voters: 11,643Total Voters: 11,643Total Voters: 11,643Total Voters: 11,643Total Voters: 11,643Total Voters: 11,643Total Voters: 11,643Total Voters: 11,643Total Voters: 11,643Deviation: -3.61%Deviation: -3.61%Deviation: -3.61%Deviation: -3.61%Deviation: -3.61%Deviation: -3.61%Deviation: -3.61%Deviation: -3.61%Deviation: -3.61%

SCOTT WARDSCOTT WARDSCOTT WARDSCOTT WARDSCOTT WARDSCOTT WARDSCOTT WARDSCOTT WARDSCOTT WARDCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Total Voters: 12,835Total Voters: 12,835Total Voters: 12,835Total Voters: 12,835Total Voters: 12,835Total Voters: 12,835Total Voters: 12,835Total Voters: 12,835Total Voters: 12,835Deviation: +6.25%Deviation: +6.25%Deviation: +6.25%Deviation: +6.25%Deviation: +6.25%Deviation: +6.25%Deviation: +6.25%Deviation: +6.25%Deviation: +6.25%

DINSDALE WARDDINSDALE WARDDINSDALE WARDDINSDALE WARDDINSDALE WARDDINSDALE WARDDINSDALE WARDDINSDALE WARDDINSDALE WARDCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Total Voters: 11,611Total Voters: 11,611Total Voters: 11,611Total Voters: 11,611Total Voters: 11,611Total Voters: 11,611Total Voters: 11,611Total Voters: 11,611Total Voters: 11,611Deviation: -3.88%Deviation: -3.88%Deviation: -3.88%Deviation: -3.88%Deviation: -3.88%Deviation: -3.88%Deviation: -3.88%Deviation: -3.88%Deviation: -3.88%

COLLIER WARDCOLLIER WARDCOLLIER WARDCOLLIER WARDCOLLIER WARDCOLLIER WARDCOLLIER WARDCOLLIER WARDCOLLIER WARDCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Total Voters: 11,748Total Voters: 11,748Total Voters: 11,748Total Voters: 11,748Total Voters: 11,748Total Voters: 11,748Total Voters: 11,748Total Voters: 11,748Total Voters: 11,748Deviation: -2.74%Deviation: -2.74%Deviation: -2.74%Deviation: -2.74%Deviation: -2.74%Deviation: -2.74%Deviation: -2.74%Deviation: -2.74%Deviation: -2.74%

DobsonDobsonDobsonDobsonDobsonDobsonDobsonDobsonDobsonWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWard

FribergFribergFribergFribergFribergFribergFribergFribergFribergWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWard

TirhatuanTirhatuanTirhatuanTirhatuanTirhatuanTirhatuanTirhatuanTirhatuanTirhatuanWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWard

DinsdaleDinsdaleDinsdaleDinsdaleDinsdaleDinsdaleDinsdaleDinsdaleDinsdaleWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWard

BairdBairdBairdBairdBairdBairdBairdBairdBairdWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWard

CollierCollierCollierCollierCollierCollierCollierCollierCollierWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWard

ScottScottScottScottScottScottScottScottScottWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWard

TaylorTaylorTaylorTaylorTaylorTaylorTaylorTaylorTaylorWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWard

ChandlerChandlerChandlerChandlerChandlerChandlerChandlerChandlerChandlerWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWardWard

UPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREE

GULLYGULLYGULLYGULLYGULLYGULLYGULLYGULLYGULLYKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELD

FERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLY

BORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIA

BAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATER

WANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNA

WANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTH

SCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBY

ROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLE

LYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELD

How to make a submission Get the Guide for Submissions by telephoning the VEC on 13 18 32 or by checking our website at www.vec.vic.gov.au Send your submissions to the VEC in one of the following ways:

• post to Level 8, 505 Little Collins Street, Melbourne, Vic. 3000;

• email to [email protected]; or

• fax to (03) 9629 9330.

Current structure of City of Knox

Knox City Council currently has nine councillors elected from nine single-member wards. The map shows the boundaries, the number of voters and the deviations as at 8 January 2007.

Electoral Representation Review of the

Knox City Council

Conducted by the

Victorian Electoral Commission q

For information about the electoral representation review in all other non-English languages call 9209 0112.

Why is this review being undertaken? Legislation requires every council to have an independent electoral representation review every eight years. The Minister for Local Government has given notice that there is to be an electoral representation review of the Knox City Council.

The Council has appointed the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) to conduct the independent review.

What will the review recommend? In carrying out the review, the VEC aims to ensure fair and equitable representation for voters of the municipality. The VEC will make a recommendation to the Minister for Local Government as to:


• the electoral structure of the council (whether it should be unsubdivided or divided into wards, how many wards there should be, and the number of councillors per ward); and

• the boundaries of the wards (if the council is to be divided into wards).

Under an unsubdivided or a multi-councillor ward structure, councillors are elected through proportional representation. Under a single-councillor ward structure, councillors are elected using preferential voting. With each system, voters mark their ballot papers the same way.

What will the VEC consider? In conducting its review, the VEC will consider such factors as the number of councillors and the electoral structure of comparable municipalities, communities of interest, demographics and growth potential. The VEC will consider a range of information including arguments and evidence in public submissions.

Key steps in the review

Step 1 Information SessionWednesday, 7 March 2007 Function Rooms, Civic Centre, 511 Burwood Highway, Wantirna South - 7.30 pm

Step 2

Preliminary Submissions Deadline: 5.00 pm

Monday, 19 March 2007 NOTE: Late submissions will not be accepted. Any person or organisation may make a submission to the VEC. The VEC recommends consulting the Guide for Submissions.

Step 3

Preliminary Report Tuesday, 10 April 2007

The VEC will release a Preliminary Report containing its preferred option(s).

Step 4

Response Submissions Deadline: 5.00 pm

Wednesday, 2 May 2007 NOTE: Late submissions will not be accepted. Any person or group may make a submission to the VEC about the Preliminary Report.

Step 5

Public Hearing Thursday, 10 May 2007 Function Rooms, Civic Centre, 511 Burwood Highway, Wantirna South - 6.30 pm

People will be able to speak in support of their response submissions.

Step 6

Final Report Monday, 28 May 2007

The VEC will lodge a final report, containing its recommendations, with the Minister for Local Government. The Report will be publicly available.


9.4 Guide for Submissions

Elec

tora

l Rep

rese

ntat

ion

Revi

ew

for

the

Knox

Cit

y Co

unci

l

Guid

e fo

r Su

bmis

sion

s

Cond

ucte

d by

the

Vict

oria

n El

ecto

ral C

omm

issi

on

Leve

l 8, 5

05 L

ittl

e Co

llins

Str

eet,

Mel

bour

ne V

ic. 3

000

Tele

phon

e: 1

3 18

32

Fax:

(03

) 96

29 9

330

Emai

l: kn

ox.r

evie

w@

vec.

vic.

gov.

au

Web

site

: ww

w.v

ec.v

ic.g

ov.a

u

Vict

oria

n El

ecto

ral C

omm

issi

on d

CHEC

KLIS

T:

Befo

re y

ou s

end

in y

our

subm

issi

on:

Hav

e yo

u in

clud

ed y

our

nam

e, a

ddre

ss a

nd t

elep

hone

con

tact

num

ber?

Do y

ou u

nder

stan

d th

at y

our

subm

issi

on w

ill b

e m

ade

publ

ic?

Hav

e yo

u gi

ven

reas

ons

for

the

mod

el(s

) yo

u ar

e su

gges

ting

?

If y

ou a

re m

akin

g a

resp

onse

sub

mis

sion

to

the

Prel

imin

ary

Repo

rt:

Hav

e yo

u fo

cuse

d yo

ur d

iscu

ssio

n on

the

mod

els

prop

osed

in t

he P

relim

inar

y Re

port

?

Hav

e yo

u in

dica

ted

whe

ther

or

not

you

wou

ld li

ke t

o sp

eak

to t

he s

ubm

issi

on a

t th

e pu

blic

he

arin

g?

In w

riti

ng y

our

subm

issi

on, y

ou m

ight

like

to

cons

ider

the

fol

low

ing

ques

tion

s (y

ou d

o no

t ne

ed t

o an

swer

eve

ry q

uest

ion

in o

rder

to

mak

e a

usef

ul s

ubm

issi

on):

The

num

ber

of c

ounc

illor

s:

Hav

e yo

u su

gges

ted

a nu

mbe

r be

twee

n 5

and

12 (

as r

equi

red

by le

gisl

atio

n)?

If t

he n

umbe

r of

cou

ncill

ors

you

have

sug

gest

ed v

arie

s su

bsta

ntia

lly f

rom

the

num

bers

in

sim

ilar-

size

d m

unic

ipal

itie

s of

a s

imila

r ty

pe, ha

ve y

ou e

xpla

ined

why

?

The

elec

tora

l str

uctu

res:

Hav

e yo

u in

dica

ted

whe

ther

you

wan

t th

e m

unic

ipal

ity

to b

e su

bdiv

ided

or

unsu

bdiv

ided

?

Hav

e yo

u ex

plai

ned

why

you

r pr

efer

red

stru

ctur

e w

ould

bes

t su

it y

our

mun

icip

alit

y?

If y

ou t

hink

tha

t th

e m

unic

ipal

ity

shou

ld b

e su

bdiv

ided

into

war

ds:

Hav

e yo

u in

dica

ted

whe

ther

you

wan

t si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

, m

ulti

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

or

a co

mbi

nati

on o

f bo

th?

Hav

e yo

u su

gges

ted

war

d na

mes

and

giv

en r

easo

ns f

or t

hose

nam

es?

Victorian Electoral Commission Page 34\

Cont

ents

TUBack

grou

ndUT..........................................................................................................

2

TUThe

revi

ew p

roce

ssUT................................................................................................

5

TUMak

ing

a su

bmis

sion

UT..............................................................................................

6

TUMat

ters

to

cons

ider

whe

n pr

epar

ing

subm

issi

onsUT.

.......................................................7

TUHow

man

y co

unci

llors

sho

uld

ther

e be

?UT................................................................

7

TUCom

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

UT.....................................................................................8

TUShou

ld t

he m

unic

ipal

ity

be u

nsub

divi

ded

or d

ivid

ed in

to w

ards

?UT..............................

9

TUVoti

ng s

yste

msUT.

...............................................................................................1

2

TUHow

sho

uld

war

d bo

unda

ries

be

draw

n?UT..............................................................

13

TUGett

ing

the

num

bers

rig

htUT................................................................................

13

TUOthe

r co

nsid

erat

ions

UT........................................................................................

13

TUWha

t sh

ould

war

ds b

e ca

lled?

UT............................................................................

14

TUGett

ing

copi

es o

f th

e Pr

elim

inar

y an

d Fi

nal R

epor

tsUT.................................................1

5

TUThe

Curr

ent

Stru

ctur

eUT...........................................................................................

15

TUThe

City

of

Knox

at

a gl

ance

UT.................................................................................1

6

TUPast

rev

iew

s of

sim

ilar

mun

icip

alit

iesUT.

....................................................................

18

TUTabl

e: P

rofi

les

of m

unic

ipal

itie

sUT............................................................................

19

2

Bac

kgro

un

d W

hat

is a

n e

lect

oral

rep

rese

nta

tion

rev

iew

?

An e

lect

oral

rep

rese

ntat

ion

revi

ew e

xam

ines

the

ele

ctor

al s

truc

ture

of

a lo

cal c

ounc

il. It

co

nsid

ers: th

e nu

mbe

r of

cou

ncill

ors

in a

mun

icip

alit

y;

whe

ther

a m

unic

ipal

ity

shou

ld b

e un

subd

ivid

ed o

r su

bdiv

ided

into

war

ds; an

d

if it

sho

uld

be s

ubdi

vide

d, w

hat

the

war

d bo

unda

ries

sho

uld

be.

In a

ddit

ion,

the

rev

iew

mus

t m

ake

sure

tha

t, w

ithi

n ea

ch m

unic

ipal

ity,

the

num

ber

of v

oter

s re

pres

ente

d by

eac

h co

unci

llor

in e

ach

war

d is

wit

hin

10%

of

the

aver

age

num

ber

of v

oter

s pe

r co

unci

llor.

Th

at w

ay, ea

ch p

erso

n’s

vote

has

the

sam

e va

lue.

Anot

her

impo

rtan

t el

emen

t to

the

se c

onsi

dera

tion

s is

tha

t, a

ccor

ding

to

the

Loca

l Go

vern

men

t Ac

t 19

89 (

the

Act)

, w

ards

wit

h on

ly o

ne c

ounc

illor

mus

t el

ect

that

cou

ncill

or

usin

g pr

efer

enti

al v

otin

g, a

nd w

ards

wit

h tw

o or

mor

e co

unci

llors

mus

t el

ect

them

via

pr

opor

tion

al r

epre

sent

atio

n. If

a m

unic

ipal

ity

is u

nsub

divi

ded,

the

n al

l of

its

coun

cillo

rs

mus

t be

ele

cted

usi

ng p

ropo

rtio

nal r

epre

sent

atio

n.

Wh

en d

o re

pres

enta

tion

rev

iew

s ta

ke p

lace

, an

d w

ho

con

duct

s th

em?

The

Loca

l Gov

ernm

ent

Act

spec

ifie

s th

at:

elec

tora

l rep

rese

ntat

ion

revi

ews

mus

t be

con

duct

ed b

efor

e ev

ery

seco

nd c

ounc

il el

ecti

on; an

d

a co

unci

l mus

t ap

poin

t an

Ele

ctor

al C

omm

issi

on t

o un

dert

ake

the

revi

ew.

On c

ompl

etio

n of

the

rev

iew

, th

e El

ecto

ral C

omm

issi

on m

akes

a r

ecom

men

dati

on t

o th

e M

inis

ter

for

Loca

l Gov

ernm

ent,

who

the

n ha

s th

e po

wer

to

act

on it

.

This

sys

tem

of

elec

tora

l rep

rese

ntat

ion

revi

ews

cam

e in

to e

ffec

t at

the

end

of

2003

as

a re

sult

of

amen

dmen

ts t

o th

e Ac

t.

The

firs

t re

pres

enta

tion

rev

iew

for

eac

h m

unic

ipal

ity

unde

r th

is s

yste

m t

akes

pla

ce a

t a

tim

e sp

ecif

ied

by t

he M

inis

ter

for

Loca

l Gov

ernm

ent

by a

no

tice

in t

he V

icto

ria G

over

nmen

t Ga

zett

e.

The

firs

t re

pres

enta

tion

rev

iew

s to

be

carr

ied

out

unde

r th

e am

ende

d Ac

t to

ok p

lace

in 2

004.

On 4

Jan

uary

200

7 th

e M

inis

ter

for

Loca

l Gov

ernm

ent

gave

not

ice

unde

r se

ctio

n 21

9C o

f th

e Lo

cal G

over

nmen

t Ac

t th

at a

n el

ecto

ral r

epre

sent

atio

n re

view

is t

o be

con

duct

ed f

or t

heKn

ox C

ity

Coun

cil.

The

Kno

x Ci

ty C

ounc

il ha

s ap

poin

ted

the

Vict

oria

n El

ecto

ral C

omm

issi

on

(VEC

) to

con

duct

the

rev

iew

.

How

did

th

e cu

rren

t el

ecto

ral s

tru

ctu

res

com

e ab

out,

an

d on

wh

at w

ere

they

bas

ed?

The

elec

tora

l str

uctu

res

curr

entl

y in

pla

ce in

mun

icip

alit

ies

acro

ss V

icto

ria

are

dive

rse.

W

hils

t ov

er h

alf

of t

he m

etro

polit

an a

nd r

egio

nal c

ounc

ils h

ave

unde

rgon

e re

view

s, m

ost

of

the

rem

aini

ng m

unic

ipal

itie

s st

ill o

pera

te u

nder

str

uctu

res

esta

blis

hed

by t

he c

omm

issi

oner

s ap

poin

ted

duri

ng t

he r

estr

uctu

res

of t

he 1

990s

. T

he c

omm

issi

oner

s di

d no

t ha

ve a

ny S

tate

-w

ide

refe

renc

e av

aila

ble

to t

hem

whe

n co

nsid

erin

g th

e ap

prop

riat

e nu

mbe

r of

cou

ncill

ors

and

elec

tora

l str

uctu

res

for

thei

r m

unic

ipal

itie

s. As

a c

onse

quen

ce, th

ere

rem

ain

subs

tant

ial d

iffe

renc

es b

etw

een

sim

ilar

mun

icip

alit

ies

acro

ss V

icto

ria.

Su

bseq

uent

to

thes

e re

form

s, in

divi

dual

cou

ncils

con

duct

ed e

lect

oral

rev

iew

s.


3

Wh

at is

th

e pu

rpos

e of

a r

epre

sen

tati

on r

evie

w?

Sect

ion

219D

of

the

Loca

l Gov

ernm

ent

Act

1989

spe

cifi

es t

hat

the

purp

ose

of a

re

pres

enta

tion

rev

iew

is t

o ac

hiev

e “f

air

and

equi

tabl

e re

pres

enta

tion

for

the

per

sons

who

ar

e en

titl

ed t

o vo

te a

t a

gene

ral e

lect

ion

of t

he C

ounc

il.”

To a

chie

ve t

his,

the

VEC

pro

ceed

s on

the

bas

is o

f th

ree

mai

n pr

inci

ples

:

1: t

o en

sure

tha

t th

e nu

mbe

r of

vot

ers

repr

esen

ted

by e

ach

coun

cillo

r is

withi

n 10

% o

f th

e av

erag

e nu

mbe

r of

vot

ers

per co

unci

llor fo

r th

at m

unic

ipal

ity

Popu

lati

ons

are

cont

inua

lly c

hang

ing

– th

ey g

row

in s

ome

area

s an

d de

clin

e in

oth

ers.

Ov

er

tim

e, t

hese

cha

nges

can

lead

to

som

e w

ards

hav

ing

larg

er o

r sm

alle

r nu

mbe

rs o

f vo

ters

. A

s pa

rt o

f a

repr

esen

tati

on r

evie

w,

the

VEC

need

s to

cor

rect

any

imba

lanc

es t

hat

have

com

e ab

out.

Th

e VE

C al

so t

ries

to

mak

e su

re t

hat

the

boun

dari

es it

set

s w

ill c

onti

nue

to p

rovi

de

equi

tabl

e re

pres

enta

tion

unt

il th

e ne

xt r

evie

w is

due

in e

ight

yea

rs, by

tak

ing

acco

unt

of

likel

y fu

ture

cha

nges

.

2: t

o ta

ke a

con

sist

ent,

Sta

te-w

ide

appr

oach

to

the

tota

l num

ber

of c

ounc

illor

s

Rega

rdin

g th

e nu

mbe

r of

cou

ncill

ors,

the

VEC

has

ado

pted

as

a gu

ide

the

num

bers

of

coun

cillo

rs in

sim

ilar-

size

d m

unic

ipal

itie

s of

sim

ilar

cate

gori

es w

ithi

n Vi

ctor

ia. I

n ad

diti

on,

the

VEC

cons

ider

s an

y sp

ecia

l cir

cum

stan

ces

that

war

rant

the

mun

icip

alit

y ha

ving

mor

e or

fe

wer

cou

ncill

ors

than

sim

ilar

mun

icip

alit

ies.

3: t

o en

sure

tha

t co

mm

unit

ies

of in

tere

st a

re a

s fa

irly

repr

esen

ted

as p

ossi

ble

Ever

y m

unic

ipal

ity

cont

ains

a n

umbe

r of

com

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

(se

e pa

ge 8

). Th

e el

ecto

ral s

truc

ture

sho

uld

be d

esig

ned

to t

ake

thes

e in

to a

ccou

nt w

here

pra

ctic

able

. T

his

is

impo

rtan

t fo

r as

sist

ing

the

elec

ted

coun

cillo

rs t

o be

eff

ecti

ve r

epre

sent

ativ

es o

f th

e pe

ople

in

the

ir p

arti

cula

r m

unic

ipal

ity.

Wh

at c

an’t

a r

epre

sen

tati

on r

evie

w d

o?

The

revi

ew c

anno

t de

al w

ith

the

exte

rnal

bou

ndar

ies

of t

he m

unic

ipal

ity,

or

such

mat

ters

as

whe

ther

the

mun

icip

alit

y sh

ould

be

divi

ded

into

tw

o se

para

te m

unic

ipal

itie

s or

am

alga

mat

ed w

ith

anot

her

mun

icip

alit

y.

On

wh

at d

oes

the

VEC

bas

e it

s re

com

men

dati

ons?

The

VEC

base

s it

s re

com

men

dati

ons

on a

num

ber

of f

acto

rs, in

clud

ing

the

follo

win

g:

inte

rnal

res

earc

h sp

ecif

ical

ly r

elat

ing

to t

he m

unic

ipal

ity

unde

r re

view

;

the

VEC’

s ex

peri

ence

fro

m it

s w

ork

wit

h ot

her

mun

icip

alit

ies

and

in s

imila

r re

view

s fo

r St

ate

elec

tion

s;

the

VEC’

s ex

pert

ise

in m

appi

ng, de

mog

raph

y an

d lo

cal g

over

nmen

t; a

nd

care

ful c

onsi

dera

tion

of

all i

nput

fro

m t

he p

ublic

in b

oth

wri

tten

and

ver

bal

subm

issi

ons

mad

e du

ring

the

cou

rse

of t

he r

evie

w.

Inpu

t fr

om t

he p

ublic

is a

n im

port

ant

part

of

the

proc

ess,

but

it is

not

the

onl

y fa

ctor

co

nsid

ered

. T

he V

EC’s

reco

mm

enda

tion

s ar

e no

t m

ade

by a

“st

raw

pol

l” o

f th

e nu

mbe

r of

su

bmis

sion

s su

ppor

ting

par

ticu

lar

mod

els.

Th

e VE

C se

eks

to e

nsur

e fa

ir a

nd e

quit

able

re

pres

enta

tion

for

all

vote

rs o

f th

e m

unic

ipal

ity.

Th

is m

eans

car

eful

ly c

onsi

deri

ng a

ll vi

ews

expr

esse

d in

sub

mis

sion

s fr

om t

he p

ublic

, bu

t al

so c

onsi

deri

ng o

ther

fac

tors

, su

ch a

s gi

ving

re

pres

enta

tion

to

com

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

(in

clud

ing

thos

e co

mm

unit

ies

of in

tere

st w

hich

m

ay n

ot b

e pa

rtic

ular

ly v

ocal

).

4

Abo

ut

the

VEC

The

Vict

oria

n El

ecto

ral C

omm

issi

on is

an

inde

pend

ent

stat

utor

y au

thor

ity

esta

blis

hed

unde

r Vi

ctor

ia’s

Elec

tora

l Act

200

2. Th

e VE

C is

not

sub

ject

to

min

iste

rial

dir

ecti

on o

r co

ntro

l in

the

perf

orm

ance

of

its

resp

onsi

bilit

ies.

Th

e VE

C’s

mai

n fu

ncti

ons

incl

ude:

cond

ucti

ng p

arlia

men

tary

ele

ctio

ns a

nd b

y-el

ecti

ons;

cond

ucti

ng lo

cal g

over

nmen

t el

ecti

ons

and

by-e

lect

ions

(w

hen

appo

inte

d by

co

unci

ls);

cond

ucti

ng r

epre

sent

atio

n re

view

s fo

r co

unci

ls;

mai

ntai

ning

an

accu

rate

and

up-

to-d

ate

regi

ster

of

elec

tors

and

pre

pari

ng r

olls

for

el

ecti

ons;

and

cont

ribu

ting

to

publ

ic u

nder

stan

ding

of

elec

tion

s an

d el

ecto

ral m

atte

rs t

hrou

gh

info

rmat

ion

and

educ

atio

n pr

ogra

mm

es.

In p

erfo

rmin

g th

ese

func

tion

s, t

he V

EC a

cts

as a

n in

depe

nden

t, im

part

ial a

utho

rity

, ac

ting

tr

ansp

aren

tly

and

wit

h in

tegr

ity.


5

The

revi

ew p

roce

ss

Tues

day,

4 Ja

nuar

y 20

07

The

revi

ew

begi

nsTh

e VE

C be

gins

con

duct

ing

rese

arch

and

pre

pari

ng m

ater

ial

for

the

publ

ic.

A no

tice

det

ailin

g th

e pr

oces

s fo

r th

e re

view

and

cal

ling

for

subm

issi

ons

is p

lace

d in

the

Her

ald

Sun,

The

Age,

The

Knox

Le

ader

and

the

Kno

x Jo

urna

l.

Febr

uary

200

7 No

tifi

cati

on

of t

he p

ublic

A le

afle

t ou

tlin

ing

the

purp

ose

and

proc

ess

of t

he r

evie

w is

de

liver

ed t

o al

l hou

seho

lds

in t

he m

unic

ipal

ity.

Wed

nesd

ay,

7 M

arch

200

7 7.

30 p

m

Info

rmat

ion

sess

ion

An in

form

atio

n se

ssio

n on

the

rev

iew

pro

cess

is h

eld

at:

Func

tion

Roo

ms,

Civ

ic C

entr

e, 5

11 B

urw

ood

Hig

hway

, W

anti

rna

Sout

h

Anyo

ne in

tere

sted

in m

akin

g a

subm

issi

on is

adv

ised

to

atte

nd.

Mon

day,

19 M

arch

200

7

5.00

pm

Clos

ing

date

fo

rpr

elim

inar

ysu

bmis

sion

s

Prel

imin

ary

subm

issi

ons

are

your

cha

nce

to c

ontr

ibut

e yo

ur

view

s an

d lo

cal k

now

ledg

e ab

out

any

issu

es r

elev

ant

to t

he

revi

ew. S

ee d

etai

ls in

the

nex

t se

ctio

n. La

te s

ubm

issi

ons

will

not

be

acce

pted

.

Tues

day,

10 A

pril

2007

Pr

elim

inar

yRe

port

rele

ased

Base

d on

the

VEC

’s re

sear

ch,

incl

udin

g in

form

atio

n pr

esen

ted

by t

he p

ublic

, th

e VE

C fo

rmul

ates

a s

erie

s of

di

ffer

ent

mod

els

for

how

the

ele

ctor

al s

truc

ture

of

the

City

of

Kno

x co

uld

be a

rran

ged.

Th

e m

odel

s th

at b

est

fit

the

VEC’

s ai

m o

f fa

irne

ss a

nd e

quit

y of

rep

rese

ntat

ion

are

pres

ente

d an

d ex

plai

ned

in t

he P

relim

inar

y Re

port

. F

or

deta

ils o

f ho

w t

o ge

t a

copy

of

the

Repo

rt, se

e be

low

.

Wed

nesd

ay,

2 M

ay 2

007

5.00

pm

Clos

ing

date

fo

r re

spon

se

subm

issi

ons

on t

he

Prel

imin

ary

Repo

rt

Any

pers

on o

r gr

oup,

incl

udin

g th

e Co

unci

l, m

ay m

ake

a re

spon

se s

ubm

issi

on t

o th

e VE

C ab

out

the

Prel

imin

ary

Repo

rt. T

his

is y

our

chan

ce t

o pr

esen

t an

y ad

diti

onal

ar

gum

ents

reg

ardi

ng w

hich

of

the

VEC’

s m

odel

s yo

u be

lieve

be

st r

epre

sent

s th

e vo

ters

of

Knox

Cit

y.

Late

sub

mis

sion

s w

ill n

ot b

e ac

cept

ed.

Thur

sday

,10

May

200

7 6.

30 p

m

Publ

iche

arin

gA

publ

ic h

eari

ng is

hel

d at

:

Func

tion

Roo

ms,

Civ

ic C

entr

e, 5

11 B

urw

ood

Hig

hway

, W

anti

rna

Sout

h

Peop

le w

ho s

tate

in t

heir

res

pons

e su

bmis

sion

s to

the

Pr

elim

inar

y Re

port

tha

t th

ey w

ant

to s

peak

in s

uppo

rt o

f th

eir

subm

issi

ons

may

do

so a

t th

is p

ublic

hea

ring

.

Mon

day,

28 M

ay 2

007

Fina

l Rep

ort

Afte

r co

nsid

erin

g an

y w

ritt

en s

ubm

issi

ons

rela

ting

to

the

Prel

imin

ary

Repo

rt, an

d in

form

atio

n pr

ovid

ed a

t th

e pu

blic

he

arin

g, t

he V

EC p

repa

res

a Fi

nal R

epor

t m

akin

g re

com

men

dati

ons

to t

he M

inis

ter

for

Loca

l Gov

ernm

ent.

For

deta

ils o

f ho

w t

o ge

t a

copy

of

the

Fina

l Rep

ort,

see

be

low

.

The

Min

iste

r fo

r Lo

cal G

over

nmen

t co

nsid

ers

the

VEC’

s re

com

men

dati

ons

and

may

mak

e a

dete

rmin

atio

n. An

y de

term

inat

ion

will

tak

e ef

fect

at

the

next

Cou

ncil

elec

tion

.

6

Mak

ing

a su

bmis

sion

An

y pe

rson

or

grou

p, in

clud

ing

the

Coun

cil,

may

mak

e a

subm

issi

on t

o th

e VE

C.

Subm

issi

ons

do n

ot h

ave

to b

e el

abor

ate

docu

men

ts; a

shor

t le

tter

is p

erfe

ctly

acc

epta

ble,

as

long

as

it a

ddre

sses

mat

ters

wit

hin

the

scop

e of

the

rev

iew

(se

e th

e ch

eckl

ist

insi

de t

he

fron

t co

ver

of t

his

docu

men

t).

Wh

en c

an p

eopl

e m

ake

subm

issi

ons?

The

VEC

acce

pts

subm

issi

ons

at t

wo

stag

es o

f th

e re

view

pro

cess

:

Prel

imin

ary

subm

issi

ons

shou

ld a

ddre

ss m

atte

rs r

elat

ing

to t

he n

umbe

r of

cou

ncill

ors

and

the

elec

tora

l str

uctu

re o

f th

e m

unic

ipal

ity.

At

thi

s st

age,

peo

ple

can

sugg

est

any

poss

ible

m

odel

s w

ithi

n th

e co

nstr

aint

s as

exp

lain

ed in

the

“M

atte

rs t

o co

nsid

er”

sect

ion

of t

his

docu

men

t. Th

e m

ost

help

ful s

ubm

issi

ons

are

gene

rally

tho

se t

hat

prov

ide

clea

r ex

plan

atio

ns o

r ev

iden

ce f

or p

arti

cula

r vi

ewpo

ints

. P

relim

inar

y su

bmis

sion

s m

ust

be

rece

ived

at

the

VEC

by M

onda

y, 1

9 M

arch

200

7 –

5.00

pm

. Lat

e su

bmis

sion

s w

ill n

ot b

e ac

cept

ed.

Resp

onse

sub

mis

sion

s on

the

Pre

limin

ary

Repo

rt c

an c

omm

ent

on a

ny is

sues

rel

atin

g to

th

e re

view

, bu

t ar

e m

ore

help

ful i

f th

ey c

omm

ent

on t

he p

refe

rred

opt

ion

and/

or t

he

alte

rnat

ive

opti

on(s

). A

lter

nati

ve m

odel

s w

ill n

ot g

ener

ally

be

cons

ider

ed a

t th

is s

tage

, as

th

ere

is n

o fu

rthe

r op

port

unit

y to

put

tho

se m

odel

s to

the

pub

lic f

or c

omm

ent.

Re

spon

se

subm

issi

ons

shou

ld in

dica

te w

heth

er t

he p

erso

n m

akin

g th

e su

bmis

sion

wis

hes

to s

peak

at

a pu

blic

hea

ring

in s

uppo

rt o

f hi

s or

her

sub

mis

sion

. R

espo

nse

subm

issi

ons

mus

t be

rec

eive

d at

the

VEC

by

Wed

nesd

ay, 2

May

200

7 –

5.00

pm

. La

te s

ubm

issi

ons

wil

l not

be

acce

pted

.

Ther

e w

ill b

e a

publ

ic h

eari

ng f

or p

eopl

e w

ho w

ant

to s

peak

in s

uppo

rt o

f th

eir

resp

onse

su

bmis

sion

s on

Thu

rsda

y, 1

0 M

ay 2

007

– 6.

30 p

m.

Peo

ple

wis

hing

to

spea

k m

ust

requ

est

to d

o so

in t

heir

res

pons

e su

bmis

sion

s.

Wh

ere

shou

ld s

ubm

issi

ons

be s

ent?

Subm

issi

ons

can

be s

ent

to t

he V

EC in

the

fol

low

ing

way

s:

post

ed t

o Le

vel 8

, 50

5 Li

ttle

Col

lins

Stre

et, M

elbo

urne

, Vi

c. 3

000;

emai

led

to k

nox.

revi

ew@

vec.

vic.

gov.

au; or

faxe

d to

(03

) 96

29 9

330.

Subm

issi

ons

mus

t in

clud

e th

e na

me,

add

ress

and

tel

epho

ne c

onta

ct n

umbe

r of

the

pe

rson

mak

ing

the

subm

issi

on.

Wit

hout

thi

s in

form

atio

n, t

he s

ubm

issi

on w

ill n

ot b

e ac

cept

ed.

Pu

blic

acc

ess

to s

ub

mis

sion

s

Once

lodg

ed,

subm

issi

ons

will

be

avai

labl

e to

the

pub

lic a

t:

the

VEC

offi

ce a

t Le

vel 8

, 50

5 Li

ttle

Col

lins

Stre

et, M

elbo

urne

; an

d

the

VEC

web

site

ww

w.v

ec.v

ic.g

ov.a

u

The

VEC

will

pub

lish

all s

ubm

issi

ons

rece

ived

by

the

due

date

on

its

web

site

. T

he n

ame

and

loca

lity

of t

he p

erso

n m

akin

g th

e su

bmis

sion

will

als

o be

pub

lishe

d. Th

e pe

rson

’s te

leph

one

num

ber,

stre

et a

ddre

ss a

nd s

igna

ture

will

not

be

publ

ishe

d. T

he re

ason

for m

akin

g su

bmis

sion

s av

aila

ble

to t

he p

ublic

is t

o en

sure

tra

nspa

renc

y in

the

ele

ctor

al re

pres

enta

tion

revi

ew p

roce

ss.


7

Mat

ters

to

con

side

r w

hen

pre

pari

ng

subm

issi

ons

Ther

e ar

e m

any

mat

ters

to

be c

onsi

dere

d w

hen

dete

rmin

ing

the

elec

tora

l str

uctu

re o

f a

mun

icip

alit

y. In

you

r su

bmis

sion

, yo

u m

ight

try

to

take

all

of t

he is

sues

into

acc

ount

, or

yo

u m

ight

just

con

cent

rate

on

one

issu

e th

at y

ou w

ish

to b

ring

to

the

VEC’

s at

tent

ion.

Th

e VE

C’s

job

is t

o lo

ok a

t al

l of

the

rele

vant

mat

ters

and

to

reac

h th

e be

st o

vera

ll so

luti

on,

base

d bo

th o

n it

s ow

n re

sear

ch a

nd s

ubm

issi

ons

rece

ived

fro

m t

he p

ublic

.

Belo

w a

re s

ome

of t

he m

ain

mat

ters

you

mig

ht li

ke t

o co

nsid

er.

How

man

y co

un

cillo

rs s

hou

ld t

her

e be

?

Und

er t

he L

ocal

Gov

ernm

ent

Act

1989

, th

e nu

mbe

r of

cou

ncill

ors

in e

very

mun

icip

alit

y m

ust

be b

etw

een

five

and

tw

elve

incl

usiv

e (s

.5B(

1)).

Th

e Ac

t do

es n

ot s

peci

fy h

ow t

o de

cide

w

hat

is t

he a

ppro

pria

te n

umbe

r, b

ut t

he V

EC h

as id

enti

fied

the

fol

low

ing

mat

ters

to

cons

ider

.

Parli

amen

t ha

s pr

ovid

ed a

ran

ge f

or t

he n

umbe

r of

cou

ncill

ors

to a

llow

for

mun

icip

alit

ies

wit

h la

rge

num

bers

of

vote

rs a

nd m

unic

ipal

itie

s w

ith

smal

ler

num

bers

. T

he n

umbe

rs o

f vo

ters

in e

ach

mun

icip

alit

y va

ry a

cros

s Vi

ctor

ia f

rom

app

roxi

mat

ely

4,00

0 to

ove

r 16

6,00

0.

The

VEC

appl

ies

thes

e pr

ovis

ions

of

the

Act

in a

logi

cal w

ay, w

ith

thos

e m

unic

ipal

itie

s th

at

have

the

larg

est

num

bers

of

vote

rs h

avin

g th

e m

ost

coun

cillo

rs, an

d th

ose

mun

icip

alit

ies

that

hav

e th

e le

ast

num

bers

of

vote

rs h

avin

g fe

wer

cou

ncill

ors.

The

VEC

has

prod

uced

a t

able

tha

t lis

ts e

ach

mun

icip

alit

y an

d it

s ar

ea, nu

mbe

r of

vot

ers

and

num

ber

of c

ounc

illor

s (s

ee t

he e

nd o

f th

is d

ocum

ent)

. T

he t

able

dif

fere

ntia

tes

betw

een

met

ropo

litan

mun

icip

alit

ies,

met

ropo

litan

/rur

al f

ring

e m

unic

ipal

itie

s, r

egio

nal

mun

icip

alit

ies

wit

h ur

ban

area

s an

d ru

ral m

unic

ipal

itie

s in

rec

ogni

tion

of

the

diff

eren

t ci

rcum

stan

ces

and

need

s of

the

se c

ateg

orie

s of

mun

icip

alit

ies.

Th

is t

able

is a

val

uabl

e re

fere

nce

poin

t in

con

side

ring

the

app

ropr

iate

num

ber

of c

ounc

illor

s. Th

is in

form

atio

n en

able

s th

e VE

C to

com

pare

the

mun

icip

alit

y be

ing

revi

ewed

to

othe

r m

unic

ipal

itie

s w

ith

sim

ilar

vote

r nu

mbe

rs a

nd a

reas

.

The

VEC

also

con

side

rs w

heth

er t

he n

umbe

r of

vot

ers

in t

he m

unic

ipal

ity

is e

xpec

ted

to

incr

ease

or

decl

ine

in t

he p

erio

d be

twee

n re

view

s (e

ight

yea

rs).

Po

pula

tion

for

ecas

ts

prod

uced

by

the

Aust

ralia

n Bu

reau

of

Stat

isti

cs a

nd t

he V

icto

rian

Dep

artm

ent

of

Sust

aina

bilit

y an

d En

viro

nmen

t ar

e us

ed t

o as

sist

the

VEC

in m

akin

g it

s as

sess

men

t.

In a

ddit

ion,

the

VEC

con

side

rs a

ny s

peci

al is

sues

or

circ

umst

ance

s th

at m

ay r

equi

re a

m

unic

ipal

ity

to h

ave

mor

e or

few

er c

ounc

illor

s th

an w

ould

oth

erw

ise

be t

he c

ase.

Th

ese

mig

ht in

clud

e su

ch is

sues

or

circ

umst

ance

s as

:

sign

ific

ant

popu

lati

on g

row

th w

ithi

n th

e m

unic

ipal

ity;

an e

spec

ially

mob

ile o

r tr

ansi

ent

popu

lati

on;

cult

ural

and

ling

uist

ic d

iver

sity

wit

hin

the

com

mun

ity;

a la

rge

prop

orti

on o

f ol

der

resi

dent

s w

ho m

ay h

ave

spec

ial i

nter

ests

and

nee

ds;

a w

ide

geog

raph

ic d

istr

ibut

ion

of v

oter

s w

ithi

n a

larg

e m

unic

ipal

ity;

or

a la

rge

num

ber

of c

omm

unit

ies

of in

tere

st (

see

belo

w).

8

Com

mu

nit

ies

of in

tere

st

An im

port

ant

part

of

achi

evin

g “f

air

and

equi

tabl

e re

pres

enta

tion

” is

mak

ing

sure

tha

t co

mm

unit

ies

of in

tere

st a

re a

ppro

pria

tely

rep

rese

nted

. C

omm

unit

ies

of in

tere

st a

re g

roup

s of

peo

ple

who

sha

re a

ran

ge o

f co

mm

on c

once

rns

or a

spir

atio

ns.

The

y ar

e di

ffer

ent

from

“i

nter

est

grou

ps”

or “

pres

sure

gro

ups”

whi

ch m

ay o

nly

have

one

issu

e in

com

mon

(or

a v

ery

limit

ed n

umbe

r of

issu

es).

Th

e co

mm

unit

ies

of in

tere

st t

o w

hich

peo

ple

belo

ng a

re o

ften

al

so a

n im

port

ant

part

of

thei

r se

lf-id

enti

ty.

Com

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

may

occ

ur w

here

peo

ple

are

linke

d w

ith

each

oth

er g

eogr

aphi

cally

(e

.g. a

tow

n or

val

ley)

or

econ

omic

ally

, su

ch a

s w

here

peo

ple

wor

k in

sim

ilar

indu

stri

es

(e.g

.to

uris

m)

or w

here

peo

ple

wor

k in

mut

ually

-dep

enda

nt in

dust

ries

(e.

g. f

ruit

gro

wer

s,

tran

spor

ters

and

can

ners

). Co

mm

unit

ies

of in

tere

st m

ay a

lso

appe

ar w

here

peo

ple

shar

e a

num

ber

of s

peci

al n

eeds

bec

ause

of

sim

ilar

circ

umst

ance

s (s

uch

as n

ew im

mig

rant

s, w

ho

may

hav

e lit

tle

Engl

ish,

req

uire

ass

ista

nce

wit

h ho

usin

g an

d ne

ed h

elp

find

ing

empl

oym

ent)

. C

omm

unit

ies

of in

tere

st m

ay a

lso

incl

ude

ethn

ic g

roup

s, r

etir

ed p

eopl

e, t

he

unem

ploy

ed o

r m

any

othe

r gr

oupi

ngs

of p

eopl

e.

Com

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

are

impo

rtan

t in

ele

ctor

al r

epre

sent

atio

n re

view

s w

hen

they

hav

e si

mila

r ne

eds

from

the

ir lo

cal g

over

nmen

t. In

suc

h ca

ses,

it is

impo

rtan

t to

end

eavo

ur t

o en

sure

tha

t co

mm

unit

ies

of in

tere

st h

ave

the

oppo

rtun

ity

to b

e fa

irly

rep

rese

nted

on

coun

cils

. T

here

are

a n

umbe

r of

way

s to

tak

e ac

coun

t of

com

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

, de

pend

ing

on h

ow t

hey

are

dist

ribu

ted

geog

raph

ical

ly.

For

exa

mpl

e:

If:

then

fai

r re

pres

enta

tion

may

bes

t be

ac

hiev

ed b

y:

a co

mm

unit

y of

inte

rest

is c

ompa

ct

geog

raph

ical

ly,

crea

ting

a w

ard

wit

h bo

unda

ries

ref

lect

ing

that

com

mun

ity

of in

tere

st.

a co

mm

unit

y of

inte

rest

is a

wid

espr

ead

min

orit

y,cr

eati

ng m

ulti

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

wit

h pr

opor

tion

al r

epre

sent

atio

n.

ther

e ar

e nu

mer

ous

min

orit

y co

mm

unit

ies

of

inte

rest

wit

hin

a m

unic

ipal

ity,

co

mbi

ning

the

com

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

, so

th

at a

ny e

lect

ed c

ounc

illor

wou

ld b

e re

spon

sibl

e to

all

of t

hese

gro

ups.

Ther

e ar

e al

so m

any

othe

r w

ays

to t

ake

com

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

into

acc

ount

.


9

Shou

ld t

he

mu

nic

ipal

ity

be u

nsu

bdiv

ided

or

divi

ded

into

war

ds?

A m

unic

ipal

ity

can

eith

er b

e un

subd

ivid

ed, w

ith

all c

ounc

illor

s el

ecte

d “a

t la

rge”

by

all o

f th

e vo

ters

, or

it c

an b

e su

bdiv

ided

into

a n

umbe

r of

war

ds. B

oth

elec

tora

l str

uctu

res

have

ad

vant

ages

and

dis

adva

ntag

es, an

d w

hich

str

uctu

re is

bes

t fo

r an

y in

divi

dual

mun

icip

alit

y w

ill d

epen

d on

the

mun

icip

alit

y’s

part

icul

ar c

ircu

mst

ance

s.

The

City

of

Knox

is c

urre

ntly

div

ided

into

nin

e w

ards

, w

ith

one

coun

cillo

r re

pres

enti

ng e

ach

war

d.

The

follo

win

g ta

bles

list

cha

ract

eris

tics

tha

t ar

e co

mm

only

con

side

red

to b

e as

soci

ated

wit

h th

e di

ffer

ent

poss

ible

ele

ctor

al s

truc

ture

s an

d m

ay b

e of

use

in d

ecid

ing

whi

ch s

truc

ture

m

ost

suit

s yo

ur m

unic

ipal

ity.

The

tabl

e at

the

end

of

this

doc

umen

t lis

ts a

ll of

Vic

tori

a’s

mun

icip

alit

ies

and

thei

r el

ecto

ral

stru

ctur

es.

Un

sub

divi

ded

mu

nic

ipal

itie

s

Uns

ubdi

vide

d m

unic

ipal

itie

s m

ust

elec

t th

eir

coun

cillo

rs b

y pr

opor

tion

al r

epre

sent

atio

n (s

ee

mor

e on

thi

s po

int

belo

w).

The

poss

ible

fea

ture

s of

an

unsu

bdiv

ided

mun

icip

alit

y ca

n be

por

tray

ed a

s fo

llow

s:

Posi

tive

Fea

ture

s Le

ss P

osit

ive

Feat

ures

Prom

otes

the

con

cept

of

a m

unic

ipal

ity-

wid

e fo

cus,

wit

h co

unci

llors

bei

ng e

lect

ed b

y an

d co

ncer

ned

for

the

mun

icip

alit

y as

a w

hole

, ra

ther

tha

n pa

roch

ial i

nter

ests

.

May

lead

to

sign

ific

ant

com

mun

itie

s of

in

tere

st a

nd p

oint

s of

vie

w b

eing

un

repr

esen

ted.

May

lead

to

coun

cillo

rs b

eing

rel

ativ

ely

inac

cess

ible

for

res

iden

ts o

f pa

rts

of t

he

mun

icip

alit

y.Gi

ves

resi

dent

s an

d ra

tepa

yers

a c

hoic

e of

co

unci

llors

to

appr

oach

wit

h th

eir

conc

erns

. M

ay le

ad t

o co

nfus

ion

of r

espo

nsib

iliti

es a

nd

dupl

icat

ion

of e

ffor

t on

the

par

t of

co

unci

llors

.

May

be

diff

icul

t fo

r vo

ters

to

asse

ss t

he

perf

orm

ance

s of

indi

vidu

al c

ounc

illor

s.

Each

vot

er h

as t

he o

ppor

tuni

ty t

o ex

pres

s a

pref

eren

ce f

or e

very

can

dida

te f

or t

he

Coun

cil e

lect

ion.

Larg

e nu

mbe

rs o

f ca

ndid

ates

mig

ht b

e co

nfus

ing

for

vote

rs.

Rem

oves

the

nee

d to

def

ine

inte

rnal

war

d bo

unda

ries

. Re

sult

s in

a s

impl

e, le

ss e

xpen

sive

vot

er r

oll

for

elec

tion

s as

com

pare

d w

ith

sepa

rate

vo

ter

rolls

for

indi

vidu

al w

ards

.

10

Opt

ion

s fo

r di

visi

on in

to w

ards

If t

he m

unic

ipal

ity

is t

o be

div

ided

into

war

ds, th

ere

are

thre

e op

tion

s:

sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds;

mul

ti-c

ounc

illor

war

ds;

and

com

bina

tion

s of

sin

gle

and

mul

ti-c

ounc

illor

war

ds.

The

Loca

l Gov

ernm

ent

Act

spec

ifie

s th

at w

ards

wit

h on

ly o

ne r

epre

sent

ativ

e m

ust

elec

t th

at

repr

esen

tati

ve v

ia p

refe

rent

ial v

otin

g, w

here

as m

ulti

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

and

uns

ubdi

vide

d m

unic

ipal

itie

s m

ust

elec

t th

eir

repr

esen

tati

ves

via

prop

orti

onal

rep

rese

ntat

ion.

As

far

as

vote

rs a

re c

once

rned

on

the

day,

it m

akes

no

diff

eren

ce. I

n pr

acti

ce, ba

llot

pape

rs lo

ok t

he

sam

e an

d ar

e fi

lled

out

in t

he s

ame

way

, re

gard

less

of

whe

ther

the

can

dida

tes

are

bein

g el

ecte

d by

pro

port

iona

l rep

rese

ntat

ion

or b

y pr

efer

enti

al v

otin

g.

Whe

ther

a w

ard

elec

ts

coun

cillo

rs v

ia p

ropo

rtio

nal r

epre

sent

atio

n or

pre

fere

ntia

l vot

ing

can

som

etim

es m

ake

a di

ffer

ence

as

to w

heth

er o

r no

t co

mm

unit

ies

of in

tere

st a

re f

airly

rep

rese

nted

.

Sin

gle-

cou

nci

llor

war

ds

The

poss

ible

fea

ture

s of

sin

gle-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

can

be

port

raye

d as

fol

low

s:

Posi

tive

Fea

ture

s Le

ss P

osit

ive

Feat

ures

Coun

cillo

rs a

re m

ore

likel

y to

be

trul

y lo

cal

repr

esen

tati

ves,

eas

ily a

cces

sibl

e to

re

side

nts

and

awar

e of

loca

l iss

ues .

Coun

cillo

rs m

ay b

e el

ecte

d on

min

or o

r pa

roch

ial i

ssue

s an

d la

ck a

per

spec

tive

of

wha

t po

licie

s be

nefi

t th

e m

unic

ipal

ity

as a

w

hole

.M

ajor

geo

grap

hica

l com

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

ar

e lik

ely

to b

e re

pres

ente

d.

War

d bo

unda

ries

may

div

ide

com

mun

itie

s of

in

tere

st, an

d m

ay b

e di

ffic

ult

to d

efin

e.

It is

less

like

ly t

hat

one

part

icul

ar p

oint

of

view

or

sect

iona

l int

eres

t w

ill d

omin

ate

the

Coun

cil.

Vo

ters

may

hav

e a

rest

rict

ed c

hoic

e of

ca

ndid

ates

in e

lect

ions

for

indi

vidu

al w

ards

.

Smal

l pop

ulat

ions

in e

ach

war

d m

ay m

ake

war

d bo

unda

ries

mor

e su

scep

tibl

e to

cha

nge

caus

ed b

y de

mog

raph

ic s

hift

s.


11

Mu

lti-

cou

nci

llor

war

ds

A m

ulti

-cou

ncill

or w

ard

stru

ctur

e re

sult

s in

few

er b

ut la

rger

war

ds t

han

a si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or

war

d st

ruct

ure.

The

poss

ible

fea

ture

s of

mul

ti-c

ounc

illor

war

ds c

an b

e po

rtra

yed

as f

ollo

ws:

Posi

tive

Fea

ture

s Le

ss P

osit

ive

Feat

ures

This

str

uctu

re s

uppo

rts

the

acco

mm

odat

ion

of a

who

le c

omm

unit

y of

inte

rest

(su

ch a

s a

size

able

tow

n or

gro

up o

f su

burb

s) w

ithi

n a

war

d.Fo

cus

on is

sues

may

be

broa

der

than

for

si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

(th

ough

cou

ncill

ors

may

be

mor

e lo

cally

foc

usse

d th

an in

an

unsu

bdiv

ided

mun

icip

alit

y).

Very

loca

l iss

ues

may

be

over

ridd

en.

Grou

ps m

ay f

orm

wit

hin

the

coun

cil b

ased

on

mul

ti-c

ounc

illor

war

ds, le

adin

g to

po

ssib

le d

ivis

ion

betw

een

coun

cillo

rs.

Coun

cillo

rs m

ay b

e m

ore

acce

ssib

le t

han

in

an u

nsub

divi

ded

mun

icip

alit

y.

In v

ery

larg

e w

ards

, co

unci

llors

may

not

be

acce

ssib

le f

or r

esid

ents

in p

arts

of

the

war

d.

Elec

tors

hav

e a

choi

ce o

f co

unci

llor

to

appr

oach

.

Coun

cillo

rs m

ay s

hare

wor

kloa

ds m

ore

effe

ctiv

ely.

Dupl

icat

ion

or g

aps

may

occ

ur if

cou

ncill

ors

do n

ot c

omm

unic

ate

or s

hare

the

ir

wor

kloa

ds e

ffec

tive

ly.

War

d bo

unda

ries

are

like

ly t

o be

eas

y to

id

enti

fy a

nd le

ss s

usce

ptib

le t

o ch

ange

as

a re

sult

of

popu

lati

on g

row

th o

r de

clin

e th

an

for

sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds.

It

is e

asie

r fo

r ca

ndid

ates

to

be e

lect

ed a

s pa

rt o

f a

voti

ng t

icke

t th

an a

s in

divi

dual

s.

Com

bin

atio

n o

f si

ngl

e-co

un

cillo

r an

d m

ult

i-co

un

cillo

r w

ards

The

poss

ible

fea

ture

s of

a c

ombi

ned

syst

em c

an b

e po

rtra

yed

as f

ollo

ws:

Posi

tive

Fea

ture

s Le

ss P

osit

ive

Feat

ures

A la

rge

com

mun

ity

of in

tere

st c

an b

e in

clud

ed w

ithi

n a

mul

ti-c

ounc

illor

war

d, a

nd

a sm

alle

r co

mm

unit

y of

inte

rest

can

be

incl

uded

wit

hin

a si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ard.

This

str

uctu

re a

ccom

mod

ates

dif

fere

nces

in

popu

lati

on a

cros

s a

mun

icip

alit

y, a

nd a

llow

s sm

all c

omm

unit

ies

to b

e se

para

tely

re

pres

ente

d.

Elec

tors

in s

ingl

e-co

unci

llor

war

ds m

ay

expe

ct t

hat

thei

r co

unci

llors

will

be

mor

e in

fluen

tial

tha

n th

eir

num

bers

sug

gest

.

Clea

r w

ard

boun

dari

es a

re m

ore

likel

y.

12

Vot

ing

syst

ems

The

voti

ng s

yste

m is

ano

ther

impo

rtan

t fa

ctor

to

take

into

acc

ount

whe

n co

nsid

erin

g w

heth

er t

o ha

ve s

ingl

e-co

unci

llor

war

ds, m

ulti

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

or

unsu

bdiv

ided

m

unic

ipal

itie

s. In

sin

gle-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

, co

unci

llors

mus

t be

ele

cted

by

pref

eren

tial

vo

ting

. I

n un

subd

ivid

ed m

unic

ipal

itie

s an

d m

ulti

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

, co

unci

llors

mus

t be

el

ecte

d by

pro

port

iona

l rep

rese

ntat

ion.

U

nder

eit

her

syst

em, pe

ople

sti

ll vo

te in

the

sam

e w

ay.

The

only

dif

fere

nces

are

the

way

tha

t th

e vo

tes

are

coun

ted.

Whe

n th

ere

are

sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds, th

e pr

efer

enti

al s

yste

m a

pplie

s. U

nder

the

pr

efer

enti

al s

yste

m:

a ca

ndid

ate

mus

t ac

hiev

e an

abs

olut

e m

ajor

ity

(50%

plu

s on

e) o

f th

e fo

rmal

vot

es t

o be

el

ecte

d;

if a

can

dida

te o

btai

ns a

n ab

solu

te m

ajor

ity

of t

he f

irst

-pre

fere

nce

vote

s, t

hen

that

ca

ndid

ate

is e

lect

ed;

if n

o ca

ndid

ate

obta

ins

an a

bsol

ute

maj

orit

y of

fir

st-p

refe

renc

e vo

tes,

pre

fere

nces

hav

e to

be

dist

ribu

ted:

othe

can

dida

te w

ith

the

low

est

num

ber

of f

irst

-pre

fere

nce

vote

s is

dec

lare

d to

be

a de

feat

ed c

andi

date

, an

d th

at c

andi

date

’s vo

tes

are

dist

ribu

ted

to t

he r

emai

ning

ca

ndid

ates

acc

ordi

ng t

o th

e se

cond

pre

fere

nces

on

the

ballo

t pa

pers

;

othe

pro

cess

of

excl

udin

g th

e lo

wes

t ca

ndid

ate

and

dist

ribu

ting

tha

t ca

ndid

ate’

s pr

efer

ence

s to

the

rem

aini

ng c

andi

date

s co

ntin

ues

unti

l one

can

dida

te h

as a

n ab

solu

te m

ajor

ity

of v

otes

, an

d is

dec

lare

d el

ecte

d.

Und

er t

his

syst

em, t

he w

ay in

whi

ch v

oter

s al

loca

te t

heir

pref

eren

ces

can

be ju

st a

s im

port

ant

as w

here

the

y pl

ace

thei

r fir

st-p

refe

renc

e vo

tes.

Can

dida

tes

advi

se v

oter

s (t

hrou

gh h

ow-t

o-vo

te c

ards

and

can

dida

te s

tate

men

ts)

abou

t ho

w t

o or

der

thei

r pr

efer

ence

s,

and

may

neg

otia

te w

ith

othe

r ca

ndid

ates

abo

ut t

he o

rder

of

pref

eren

ces.

In

som

e ca

ses,

ca

ndid

ates

hav

e in

form

al “

runn

ing

mat

es”

to h

elp

wit

h th

e flo

w o

f pr

efer

ence

s to

the

m.

Whe

n th

ere

are

mul

ti-c

ounc

illor

war

ds o

r un

subd

ivid

ed m

unic

ipal

itie

s, p

ropo

rtio

nal

repr

esen

tati

onap

plie

s.

The

basi

s of

pro

port

iona

l rep

rese

ntat

ion

is t

hat

cand

idat

es a

re

elec

ted

in p

ropo

rtio

n to

the

ir s

uppo

rt.

Und

er t

he p

ropo

rtio

nal r

epre

sent

atio

n sy

stem

:

oto

be

elec

ted,

a c

andi

date

mus

t ob

tain

a “

quot

a”,

whi

ch is

cal

cula

ted

by d

ivid

ing

the

tota

l num

ber

of v

otes

by

one

mor

e th

an t

he n

umbe

r of

vac

anci

es, an

d th

en

addi

ng o

ne (

for

exam

ple,

in a

n el

ecti

on f

or 3

vac

anci

es w

ith

800

vote

s ca

st,

the

quot

a w

ould

be

201)

;

ow

hen

a ca

ndid

ate

rece

ives

mor

e vo

tes

than

a q

uota

, th

e su

rplu

s vo

tes

are

dist

ribu

ted

to t

he c

onti

nuin

g ca

ndid

ates

at

a re

duce

d va

lue,

cal

cula

ted

by d

ivid

ing

the

surp

lus

vote

s by

the

tot

al v

otes

for

the

can

dida

te (

for

exam

ple,

if a

can

dida

te

achi

eved

300

vot

es a

nd t

he q

uota

was

201

vot

es,

the

cand

idat

e’s

surp

lus

wou

ld b

e 99

, an

d ba

llot

pape

rs w

ould

be

tran

sfer

red

to t

he r

emai

ning

can

dida

tes

at a

val

ue o

f 99

div

ided

by

300)

;

ow

hen

all s

urpl

us v

otes

hav

e be

en d

istr

ibut

ed a

nd t

here

are

sti

ll va

canc

ies

to b

e fi

lled,

pre

fere

nces

are

dis

trib

uted

fro

m t

he lo

wes

t-sc

orin

g ca

ndid

ates

unt

il a

cand

idat

e ha

s a

quot

a.

This

sys

tem

mea

ns t

hat

any

cand

idat

e w

ho o

btai

ns a

quo

ta, ei

ther

thr

ough

fir

st-p

refe

renc

e vo

tes

or t

hrou

gh t

he f

low

of

pref

eren

ces,

is e

lect

ed.

In

effe

ct, ca

ndid

ates

rep

rese

ntin

g la

rge

min

orit

ies

are

likel

y to

be

repr

esen

ted

as w

ell a

s ca

ndid

ates

rep

rese

ntin

g m

ajor

itie

s.


13

Prop

orti

onal

rep

rese

ntat

ion

has

a nu

mbe

r of

key

dif

fere

nces

to

the

exha

usti

ve p

refe

rent

ial

syst

em,

whi

ch a

pplie

d, in

uns

ubdi

vide

d m

unic

ipal

itie

s an

d m

ulti

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

at

elec

tion

s pr

ior

to 2

004.

Pr

opor

tion

al r

epre

sent

atio

n m

ay r

etur

n qu

ite

diff

eren

t re

sult

s to

th

e ol

d sy

stem

. Pr

opor

tion

al r

epre

sent

atio

n sh

ould

ret

urn

cand

idat

es t

hat

are

mor

e re

pres

enta

tive

of

vote

rs’ c

hoic

es a

nd m

akes

it m

ore

diff

icul

t fo

r ca

ndid

ates

to

be e

lect

ed a

s pa

rt o

f a

tick

et.

How

sh

ould

war

d bo

un

dari

es b

e dr

awn

?

Get

tin

g th

e n

um

bers

rig

ht

If t

he C

ity

of K

nox

is t

o re

mai

n di

vide

d in

to w

ards

, th

e w

ard

boun

dari

es m

ust

com

ply

wit

h le

gal r

equi

rem

ents

. S

ecti

on 2

19D

of t

he L

ocal

Gov

ernm

ent

Act

1989

req

uire

s th

at:

the

num

ber

of v

oter

s re

pres

ente

d by

eac

h co

unci

llor

mus

t be

wit

hin

10%

of

the

aver

age

num

ber

of v

oter

s pe

r co

unci

llor

for

that

mun

icip

alit

y; a

nd

the

war

d bo

unda

ries

mus

t pr

ovid

e a

fair

and

equ

itab

le d

ivis

ion

of t

he m

unic

ipal

di

stri

ct.

Whe

re t

here

are

mul

ti-c

ounc

illor

war

ds, th

e nu

mbe

r of

vot

ers

repr

esen

ted

by e

ach

coun

cillo

r fo

r su

ch w

ards

is t

aken

to

be t

he t

otal

num

ber

of v

oter

s fo

r th

e w

ard

divi

ded

by t

he n

umbe

r of

cou

ncill

ors

for

the

war

d. Fo

r in

stan

ce,

if t

here

are

3 c

ounc

illor

s an

d 12

,000

vot

ers

for

a w

ard,

the

num

ber

of v

oter

s re

pres

ente

d by

eac

h co

unci

llor

will

be

4,00

0, t

hat

is 1

2,00

0 di

vide

d by

3.

War

d bo

unda

ries

mus

t m

eet

the

appr

oxim

ate

equa

lity

requ

irem

ent

set

by t

he A

ct. T

he

num

ber

of v

oter

s re

pres

ente

d by

eac

h co

unci

llor

cann

ot b

e m

ore

than

10%

out

side

the

av

erag

e nu

mbe

r fo

r al

l cou

ncill

ors.

In

the

Cit

y of

Kno

x at

pre

sent

, Ta

ylor

War

d is

ver

y cl

ose

to t

he 1

0% li

mit

.

Oth

er c

onsi

dera

tion

s

The

Act

does

not

pre

scri

be a

ny m

ore

deta

ils t

o de

fine

wha

t co

nsti

tute

s a

fair

and

equ

itab

le

divi

sion

of

the

mun

icip

alit

y. H

owev

er,

the

follo

win

g cr

iter

ia a

re u

sefu

l in

cons

ider

ing

and

(whe

re p

ossi

ble)

dec

idin

g on

pro

pose

d w

ard

boun

dari

es:

the

boun

daries

sho

uld

take

acc

ount

of

com

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

;

the

boun

daries

sho

uld

follo

w c

lear

line

s, s

uch

as m

ajor

roa

ds,

rive

rs a

nd o

ther

na

tura

l fea

ture

s;

grow

ing

area

s sh

ould

not

be

conc

entr

ated

into

one

war

d, b

ut s

houl

d be

spr

ead

over

se

vera

l war

ds; an

d

the

boun

daries

sho

uld

take

acc

ount

of

likel

y po

pula

tion

cha

nges

, by

set

ting

the

nu

mbe

r of

vot

ers

in w

ards

wit

h hi

gh g

row

th p

oten

tial

som

ewha

t be

low

the

ave

rage

, an

d th

e nu

mbe

r of

vot

ers

in w

ards

wit

h lit

tle

grow

th p

oten

tial

som

ewha

t ab

ove

the

aver

age.

Th

is a

ppro

ach

will

hel

p en

sure

tha

t th

e bo

unda

ries

sta

y w

ithi

n th

e 10

%

tole

ranc

e fo

r a

long

er p

erio

d, a

void

ing

the

need

for

fre

quen

t re

draw

ing

of

boun

dari

es.

In d

evel

opin

g w

ard

boun

dari

es,

the

VEC

aim

s to

ach

ieve

the

bes

t po

ssib

le b

alan

ce a

mon

g th

ese

crit

eria

.

14

Wh

at s

hou

ld w

ards

be

calle

d?

Ther

e is

a v

arie

ty o

f po

ssib

le a

ppro

ache

s to

the

nam

ing

of w

ards

, in

clud

ing:

Plac

e na

mes

: A n

umbe

r of

mun

icip

alit

ies

nam

e th

eir

war

ds a

fter

loca

litie

s in

the

w

ards

. T

his

appr

oach

is u

sefu

l whe

re w

ard

boun

daries

clo

sely

alig

n w

ith

loca

litie

s.

How

ever

, it

can

lead

to

peop

le in

sm

alle

r lo

calit

ies

wit

hin

a w

ard

feel

ing

over

look

ed,

and

may

cau

se c

onfu

sion

if t

he lo

calit

y th

at a

war

d is

nam

ed a

fter

cut

s ac

ross

a w

ard

boun

dary

;

Com

pass

dir

ecti

ons:

Thi

s is

the

cur

rent

app

roac

h in

, fo

r ex

ampl

e, t

he C

ity

of

Whi

ttle

sea,

whe

re t

he w

ards

are

Eas

t, N

orth

and

Wes

t. It

is s

trai

ghtf

orw

ard.

It

is

of m

ost

use

whe

re t

he lo

cati

on o

f th

e w

ards

is c

lose

ly a

ligne

d to

com

pass

di

rect

ions

;

Nam

es o

f hi

stor

ic b

uild

ings

: Thi

s is

a w

ay o

f ce

lebr

atin

g th

e m

unic

ipal

ity’

s he

rita

ge;

Nam

es o

f na

tura

l fea

ture

s: U

sing

the

nam

es o

f na

tura

l fea

ture

s su

ch a

s hi

lls o

r st

ream

s ca

n be

a w

ay o

f id

enti

fyin

g w

ards

wit

hout

the

com

plic

atio

ns o

f lo

calit

y na

mes

. T

he f

eatu

res

wou

ld n

eed

to b

e w

ell k

now

n an

d re

leva

nt t

o th

e pa

rtic

ular

w

ards

;

Nam

es o

f pi

onee

rs a

nd f

orm

er p

rom

inen

t ci

tize

ns: T

his

is a

way

of

reco

gnis

ing

impo

rtan

t fo

rmer

res

iden

ts. I

t is

mos

t ap

prop

riat

e w

hen

the

pers

on is

clo

sely

as

soci

ated

wit

h th

e ar

ea c

over

ed b

y th

e w

ard;

and

Abor

igin

al n

ames

: Thi

s is

a w

ay o

f re

cogn

isin

g th

e m

unic

ipal

ity’

s Ab

orig

inal

he

rita

ge. H

owev

er, th

e us

e of

Abo

rigi

nal n

ames

cou

ld b

e se

en a

s be

ing

toke

nist

ic if

th

e na

mes

are

not

rel

evan

t to

are

as w

ithi

n th

e m

unic

ipal

ity.


15

Get

tin

g co

pies

of

the

Pre

limin

ary

and

Fin

al R

epor

ts

Copi

es o

f th

e Pr

elim

inar

y an

d Fi

nal R

epor

ts w

ill b

e av

aila

ble

from

the

VEC

web

site

, w

ww

.vec

.vic

.gov

.au,

by

cont

acti

ng t

he V

EC o

n 13

18

32, an

d at

the

Kno

x Ci

ty C

ounc

il of

fice

s.

Whe

n th

e Pr

elim

inar

y Re

port

is r

elea

sed,

a n

otic

e in

The

Age

, th

e Kn

ox L

eade

r an

d th

e Kn

ox

Jour

nalw

ill s

peci

fy h

ow p

eopl

e ca

n m

ake

a w

ritt

en s

ubm

issi

on in

res

pons

e to

the

Rep

ort.

The

Prel

imin

ary

Repo

rt w

ill b

e av

aila

ble

from

Tue

sday

, 10

Apri

l 200

7.

The

Fina

l Rep

ort

will

be

rele

ased

on

Mon

day,

28

May

200

7.

The

Cu

rren

t St

ruct

ure

The

City

of

Knox

is a

sub

divi

ded

mun

icip

alit

y w

ith

nine

war

ds, re

pres

ente

d by

nin

e co

unci

llors

who

are

ele

cted

by

pref

eren

tial

vot

ing.

Th

e m

ap b

elow

sho

ws

the

curr

ent

war

d bo

unda

ries

and

the

vot

er n

umbe

rs a

nd

devi

atio

ns f

rom

the

ave

rage

num

ber

of v

oter

s pe

r co

unci

llor

as a

t 1

Janu

ary

2007

.

BAIR

D W

ARD

BAIR

D W

ARD

BAIR

D W

ARD

BAIR

D W

ARD

BAIR

D W

ARD

BAIR

D W

ARD

BAIR

D W

ARD

BAIR

D W

ARD

BAIR

D W

ARD

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,31

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,31

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,31

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,31

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,31

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,31

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,31

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,31

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,31

5D

evia

tion:

-6

.33%

Dev

iatio

n:

-6.3

3%D

evia

tion:

-6

.33%

Dev

iatio

n:

-6.3

3%D

evia

tion:

-6

.33%

Dev

iatio

n:

-6.3

3%D

evia

tion:

-6

.33%

Dev

iatio

n:

-6.3

3%D

evia

tion:

-6

.33%

TAYL

OR

WAR

DTA

YLO

R W

ARD

TAYL

OR

WAR

DTA

YLO

R W

ARD

TAYL

OR

WAR

DTA

YLO

R W

ARD

TAYL

OR

WAR

DTA

YLO

R W

ARD

TAYL

OR

WAR

DCo

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Tota

l Vot

ers:

13,

195

Tota

l Vot

ers:

13,

195

Tota

l Vot

ers:

13,

195

Tota

l Vot

ers:

13,

195

Tota

l Vot

ers:

13,

195

Tota

l Vot

ers:

13,

195

Tota

l Vot

ers:

13,

195

Tota

l Vot

ers:

13,

195

Tota

l Vot

ers:

13,

195

Dev

iatio

n: +

9.23

%D

evia

tion:

+9.

23%

Dev

iatio

n: +

9.23

%D

evia

tion:

+9.

23%

Dev

iatio

n: +

9.23

%D

evia

tion:

+9.

23%

Dev

iatio

n: +

9.23

%D

evia

tion:

+9.

23%

Dev

iatio

n: +

9.23

%

DO

BSO

N W

ARD

DO

BSO

N W

ARD

DO

BSO

N W

ARD

DO

BSO

N W

ARD

DO

BSO

N W

ARD

DO

BSO

N W

ARD

DO

BSO

N W

ARD

DO

BSO

N W

ARD

DO

BSO

N W

ARD

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,38

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,38

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,38

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,38

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,38

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,38

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,38

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,38

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,38

1D

evia

tion:

+2.

50%

Dev

iatio

n: +

2.50

%D

evia

tion:

+2.

50%

Dev

iatio

n: +

2.50

%D

evia

tion:

+2.

50%

Dev

iatio

n: +

2.50

%D

evia

tion:

+2.

50%

Dev

iatio

n: +

2.50

%D

evia

tion:

+2.

50%

FRIB

ERG

WAR

DFR

IBER

G W

ARD

FRIB

ERG

WAR

DFR

IBER

G W

ARD

FRIB

ERG

WAR

DFR

IBER

G W

ARD

FRIB

ERG

WAR

DFR

IBER

G W

ARD

FRIB

ERG

WAR

DCo

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Tota

l Vot

ers:

12,

516

Tota

l Vot

ers:

12,

516

Tota

l Vot

ers:

12,

516

Tota

l Vot

ers:

12,

516

Tota

l Vot

ers:

12,

516

Tota

l Vot

ers:

12,

516

Tota

l Vot

ers:

12,

516

Tota

l Vot

ers:

12,

516

Tota

l Vot

ers:

12,

516

Dev

iatio

n: +

3.61

%D

evia

tion:

+3.

61%

Dev

iatio

n: +

3.61

%D

evia

tion:

+3.

61%

Dev

iatio

n: +

3.61

%D

evia

tion:

+3.

61%

Dev

iatio

n: +

3.61

%D

evia

tion:

+3.

61%

Dev

iatio

n: +

3.61

%

CHAN

DLE

R W

ARD

CHAN

DLE

R W

ARD

CHAN

DLE

R W

ARD

CHAN

DLE

R W

ARD

CHAN

DLE

R W

ARD

CHAN

DLE

R W

ARD

CHAN

DLE

R W

ARD

CHAN

DLE

R W

ARD

CHAN

DLE

R W

ARD

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,47

2To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,47

2To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,47

2To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,47

2To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,47

2To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,47

2To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,47

2To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,47

2To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,47

2D

evia

tion:

-5

.03%

Dev

iatio

n:

-5.0

3%D

evia

tion:

-5

.03%

Dev

iatio

n:

-5.0

3%D

evia

tion:

-5

.03%

Dev

iatio

n:

-5.0

3%D

evia

tion:

-5

.03%

Dev

iatio

n:

-5.0

3%D

evia

tion:

-5

.03%

TIRH

ATU

AN W

ARD

TIRH

ATU

AN W

ARD

TIRH

ATU

AN W

ARD

TIRH

ATU

AN W

ARD

TIRH

ATU

AN W

ARD

TIRH

ATU

AN W

ARD

TIRH

ATU

AN W

ARD

TIRH

ATU

AN W

ARD

TIRH

ATU

AN W

ARD

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,64

3To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,64

3To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,64

3To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,64

3To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,64

3To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,64

3To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,64

3To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,64

3To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,64

3D

evia

tion:

-3

.61%

Dev

iatio

n:

-3.6

1%D

evia

tion:

-3

.61%

Dev

iatio

n:

-3.6

1%D

evia

tion:

-3

.61%

Dev

iatio

n:

-3.6

1%D

evia

tion:

-3

.61%

Dev

iatio

n:

-3.6

1%D

evia

tion:

-3

.61%

SCO

TT W

ARD

SCO

TT W

ARD

SCO

TT W

ARD

SCO

TT W

ARD

SCO

TT W

ARD

SCO

TT W

ARD

SCO

TT W

ARD

SCO

TT W

ARD

SCO

TT W

ARD

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,83

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,83

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,83

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,83

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,83

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,83

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,83

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,83

5To

tal V

oter

s: 1

2,83

5D

evia

tion:

+6.

25%

Dev

iatio

n: +

6.25

%D

evia

tion:

+6.

25%

Dev

iatio

n: +

6.25

%D

evia

tion:

+6.

25%

Dev

iatio

n: +

6.25

%D

evia

tion:

+6.

25%

Dev

iatio

n: +

6.25

%D

evia

tion:

+6.

25%

DIN

SDAL

E W

ARD

DIN

SDAL

E W

ARD

DIN

SDAL

E W

ARD

DIN

SDAL

E W

ARD

DIN

SDAL

E W

ARD

DIN

SDAL

E W

ARD

DIN

SDAL

E W

ARD

DIN

SDAL

E W

ARD

DIN

SDAL

E W

ARD

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,61

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,61

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,61

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,61

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,61

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,61

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,61

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,61

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,61

1D

evia

tion:

-3

.88%

Dev

iatio

n:

-3.8

8%D

evia

tion:

-3

.88%

Dev

iatio

n:

-3.8

8%D

evia

tion:

-3

.88%

Dev

iatio

n:

-3.8

8%D

evia

tion:

-3

.88%

Dev

iatio

n:

-3.8

8%D

evia

tion:

-3

.88%

COLL

IER W

ARD

COLL

IER W

ARD

COLL

IER W

ARD

COLL

IER W

ARD

COLL

IER W

ARD

COLL

IER W

ARD

COLL

IER W

ARD

COLL

IER W

ARD

COLL

IER W

ARD

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1Co

unci

llors

: 1

Coun

cillo

rs:

1To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,74

8To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,74

8To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,74

8To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,74

8To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,74

8To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,74

8To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,74

8To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,74

8To

tal V

oter

s: 1

1,74

8D

evia

tion:

-2

.74%

Dev

iatio

n:

-2.7

4%D

evia

tion:

-2

.74%

Dev

iatio

n:

-2.7

4%D

evia

tion:

-2

.74%

Dev

iatio

n:

-2.7

4%D

evia

tion:

-2

.74%

Dev

iatio

n:

-2.7

4%D

evia

tion:

-2

.74%

Dob

son

Dob

son

Dob

son

Dob

son

Dob

son

Dob

son

Dob

son

Dob

son

Dob

son

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

d

Frib

erg

Frib

erg

Frib

erg

Frib

erg

Frib

erg

Frib

erg

Frib

erg

Frib

erg

Frib

erg

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

d

Tirh

atu

anTi

rhat

uan

Tirh

atu

anTi

rhat

uan

Tirh

atu

anTi

rhat

uan

Tirh

atu

anTi

rhat

uan

Tirh

atu

anW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

Din

sdal

eD

insd

ale

Din

sdal

eD

insd

ale

Din

sdal

eD

insd

ale

Din

sdal

eD

insd

ale

Din

sdal

eW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

Bai

rdB

aird

Bai

rdB

aird

Bai

rdB

aird

Bai

rdB

aird

Bai

rdW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

Col

lier

Col

lier

Col

lier

Col

lier

Col

lier

Col

lier

Col

lier

Col

lier

Col

lier

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

d

Sco

ttS

cott

Sco

ttS

cott

Sco

ttS

cott

Sco

ttS

cott

Sco

ttW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

Tayl

orTa

ylor

Tayl

orTa

ylor

Tayl

orTa

ylor

Tayl

orTa

ylor

Tayl

orW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

Ch

andl

erC

han

dler

Ch

andl

erC

han

dler

Ch

andl

erC

han

dler

Ch

andl

erC

han

dler

Ch

andl

erW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

War

dW

ard

UPP

ERU

PPER

UPP

ERU

PPER

UPP

ERU

PPER

UPP

ERU

PPER

UPP

ERFE

RN

TREE

FERN

TREE

FERN

TREE

FERN

TREE

FERN

TREE

FERN

TREE

FERN

TREE

FERN

TREE

FERN

TREE

GU

LLY

GU

LLY

GU

LLY

GU

LLY

GU

LLY

GU

LLY

GU

LLY

GU

LLY

GU

LLY

KNO

XFIE

LDKN

OXF

IELD

KNO

XFIE

LDKN

OXF

IELD

KNO

XFIE

LDKN

OXF

IELD

KNO

XFIE

LDKN

OXF

IELD

KNO

XFIE

LD

FERN

TREE

GU

LLY

FERN

TREE

GU

LLY

FERN

TREE

GU

LLY

FERN

TREE

GU

LLY

FERN

TREE

GU

LLY

FERN

TREE

GU

LLY

FERN

TREE

GU

LLY

FERN

TREE

GU

LLY

FERN

TREE

GU

LLY

BORO

NIA

BORO

NIA

BORO

NIA

BORO

NIA

BORO

NIA

BORO

NIA

BORO

NIA

BORO

NIA

BORO

NIA

BAYS

WAT

E RBA

YSW

ATER

BAYS

WAT

ERBA

YSW

ATER

BAYS

WAT

ERBA

YSW

ATER

BAYS

WAT

ERBA

YSW

ATER

BAYS

WAT

ER

WAN

TIRN

AW

ANTI

RNA

WAN

TIRN

AW

ANTI

RNA

WAN

TIRN

AW

ANTI

RNA

WAN

TIRN

AW

ANTI

RNA

WAN

TIRN

A

WAN

TIRN

A SO

UTH

WAN

TIRN

A SO

UTH

WAN

TIRN

A SO

UTH

WAN

TIRN

A SO

UTH

WAN

TIRN

A SO

UTH

WAN

TIRN

A SO

UTH

WAN

TIRN

A SO

UTH

WAN

TIRN

A SO

UTH

WAN

TIRN

A SO

UTH

SCO

RESB

YSC

ORE

SBY

SCO

RESB

YSC

ORE

SBY

SCO

RESB

YSC

ORE

SBY

SCO

RESB

YSC

ORE

SBY

SCO

RESB

Y

RO

WVI

LLE

RO

WVI

LLE

RO

WVI

LLE

RO

WVI

LLE

RO

WVI

LLE

RO

WVI

LLE

RO

WVI

LLE

RO

WVI

LLE

RO

WVI

LLE

LYST

ERFI

ELD

LYST

ERFI

ELD

LYST

ERFI

ELD

LYST

ERFI

ELD

LYST

ERFI

ELD

LYST

ERFI

ELD

LYST

ERFI

ELD

LYST

ERFI

ELD

LYST

ERFI

ELD

A br

eak-

dow

n of

vot

er n

umbe

rs b

y Ce

nsus

Col

lect

or D

istr

ict

is a

vaila

ble

from

the

VEC

w

ebsi

te –

ww

w.v

ec.v

ic.g

ov.a

u –

or b

y ca

lling

the

VEC

on

13 1

8 32

. Th

is c

an b

e us

ed

to s

ee m

ore

prec

isel

y w

here

vot

ers

are

loca

ted

wit

hin

the

mun

icip

alit

y.

16

The

Cit

y of

Kn

ox a

t a

glan

ceTh

e Ci

ty o

f Kn

ox, w

as p

rocl

aim

ed in

199

4, a

nd is

loca

ted

in t

he o

uter

eas

tern

m

etro

polit

an a

rea

appr

oxim

atel

y 25

kms

from

the

Mel

bour

ne G

PO. Th

e Ci

ty in

clud

es

the

subu

rbs

of F

ernt

ree

Gully

, U

pper

Fer

ntre

e Gu

lly, Bo

roni

a, T

he B

asin

, Ro

wvi

lle,

Wan

tirn

a, W

anti

rna

Sout

h, L

yste

rfie

ld, Kn

oxfi

eld,

Sco

resb

y an

d Ba

ysw

ater

.

Knox

is o

ne o

f th

e m

ost

popu

lous

mun

icip

alit

ies

in V

icto

ria

wit

h al

mos

t 15

0,00

0 re

side

nts

livin

g in

ele

ven

loca

litie

s.Kn

ox r

esid

ents

are

pro

ud o

f th

eir

city

’s le

afy

gree

n im

age,

and

are

pro

tect

ive

of t

he n

earb

y fo

othi

lls a

nd o

ther

pla

ces

of

biol

ogic

al s

igni

fica

nce.

It

is a

com

mun

ity

wit

h re

side

nts

from

130

dif

fere

nt

coun

trie

s w

ho s

peak

54

lang

uage

s.

In o

nly

thir

ty y

ears

, ho

usin

g, b

usin

ess

and

com

mer

cial

dev

elop

men

t ha

s sp

rung

up

acro

ss t

he o

nce

rura

l lan

dsca

pe o

f Kn

ox. T

here

is s

ubst

anti

al lo

cal e

mpl

oym

ent

in

busi

ness

, re

tail

and

man

ufac

turi

ng. T

he m

ain

indu

stri

es in

clud

e ch

emic

al p

rodu

ct

and

food

man

ufac

turi

ng. M

oder

n in

dust

rial

est

ates

are

foc

ussi

ng o

n fu

ture

te

chno

logi

es a

nd t

hriv

ing,

mod

ern

shop

ping

and

com

mer

cial

pre

cinc

ts f

eatu

re in

its

subu

rbs.

Th

ere

is in

tere

st in

the

art

s, le

isur

e an

d re

crea

tion

al p

ursu

its.

The

Urb

an G

row

th B

ound

ary

win

ds t

hrou

gh t

he n

orth

east

and

sou

thea

st c

orne

rs o

f th

e m

unic

ipal

ity,

and

pop

ulat

ion

grow

th is

slo

win

g. By

201

5 an

est

imat

ed 2

6% o

f th

e Kn

ox p

opul

atio

n w

ill b

e ov

er 6

5. T

hese

cha

ngin

g de

mog

raph

ics

are

impa

ctin

g on

ho

usin

g de

velo

pmen

t an

d se

rvic

es. T

here

is a

dec

reas

e in

new

hou

sing

sub

divi

sion

s an

d an

incr

ease

in m

ulti

-uni

t de

velo

pmen

ts.

(Sou

rces

: De

part

men

t of

Sus

tain

abili

ty a

nd E

nvir

onm

ent

Vict

oria

in F

utur

e 20

04; De

part

men

t of

Su

stai

nabi

lity

and

Envi

ronm

ent

Mel

bour

ne in

Fac

t 20

01; De

part

men

t of

Sus

tain

abili

ty a

nd

Envi

ronm

ent

Vict

oria

Pop

ulat

ion

Bulle

tin

2006

; De

part

men

t of

Sus

tain

abili

ty a

nd E

nvir

onm

ent

Know

Your

Are

a; K

nox

City

Cou

ncil

web

site

)


17

Size

Knox

Cit

y

Mel

bour

ne

Met

ropo

litan

Coun

cils

(med

ians

)

Mel

bour

ne

Met

ropo

litan

Fri

nge

Coun

cils

(med

ians

) Ar

ea (

squa

re k

ilom

etre

s)

114

61

504

Popu

lati

onP2 P

149,

930

120,

562

115,

532

Popu

lati

on d

ensi

ty

(peo

ple/

squa

re k

m)

1315

1,

999.

52

213.

16

Vote

rs

108,

716

88,6

72

90,0

65

Econ

omic

pro

file

P1 P

Kn

ox C

ity

Met

ropo

litan

M

elbo

urne

Re

gion

al V

icto

ria

Maj

or in

dust

ries

(p

erce

ntag

es o

f w

orkf

orce

)

Man

ufac

turin

g 19

16.0

13

.4

Reta

il tr

ade

17.1

14

.6

15.3

Acco

mm

odat

ion,

caf

és, re

stau

rant

s,

cultu

ral a

nd rec

reat

ion

serv

ices

2.

9 6.

9 6.

9

Prop

erty

and

bus

ines

s se

rvic

es

10.3

13

.1

6.6

Educ

atio

n5.

5 6.

9 3.

3

Heal

th a

nd c

omm

unity

serv

ices

8.

4 9.

3 10

.8

Agric

ultu

re, Fo

rest

ry a

nd F

ishi

ng

0.4

0.8

11.2

Une

mpl

oym

ent

rate

5.

1%

6.3%

7.

4%

Hou

seho

lds

earn

ing

unde

r $5

00/w

eek

19.2

24

.5%

34

.6%

Pop

ula

tion

pro

file

P1

Knox

Cit

y

Mel

bour

ne M

etro

polit

an

Coun

cils

Mel

bour

ne

Met

ropo

litan

fri

nge

coun

cils

Age

grou

ps

(per

cent

ages

of

the

popu

lati

on)

0-17

yea

rs o

ld

27.5

22

.1

29.2

18

-34

year

s ol

d 24

.2

26.9

23

.7

35-4

9 ye

ars

old

24

22.4

23

.6

50+

year

s ol

d 24

.2

28.6

23

.6

Expe

cted

pop

ulat

ion

grow

th

(200

6-20

16)P3 P

2.19

%

7.99

%

47.7

6%

1 –

stat

isti

cs f

rom

200

1 Ce

nsus

2

– De

part

men

t of

Sus

tain

abili

ty a

nd E

nviron

men

t re

vise

d es

tim

ates

200

5 Po

pula

tion

Bul

letin

2006

3 –

base

d on

Dep

artm

ent

of S

usta

inab

ility

and

Env

iron

men

t Vi

ctor

ia in

Fut

ure

2004

est

imat

es

18

Pas

t re

view

s of

sim

ilar

mu

nic

ipal

itie

s Th

e Ci

ty o

f Kn

ox is

a p

redo

min

antl

y ur

ban

mun

icip

alit

y w

ith

area

s of

nat

iona

l par

k an

d le

ss d

evel

oped

land

in t

he f

ooth

ills

on t

he e

aste

rn f

ring

e. T

he U

rban

Gro

wth

Bo

unda

ry w

inds

thr

ough

the

eas

tern

par

ts o

f th

e m

unic

ipal

ity.

In

som

e re

spec

ts,

the

City

of

Knox

is s

imila

r to

the

Cit

ies

of B

rim

bank

and

Gle

n Ei

ra w

here

the

VEC

co

nduc

ted

revi

ews

in 2

004-

2005

. T

he n

umbe

r of

vot

ers

in K

nox

is s

imila

r to

the

nu

mbe

r of

vot

ers

in G

len

Eira

, an

d Br

imba

nk is

clo

se in

are

a. W

hen

the

VEC

cond

ucte

d th

ose

revi

ews,

it m

ade

the

follo

win

g re

com

men

dati

ons:

Mun

icip

alit

y:

Befo

re r

evie

w:

Fina

l rec

omm

enda

tion

:

City

of

Glen

Eir

a ni

ne c

ounc

illor

s el

ecte

d fr

om

thre

e th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

ni

ne c

ounc

illor

s el

ecte

d fr

om

thre

e th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

City

of

Brim

bank

ni

ne c

ounc

illor

s el

ecte

d fr

om n

ine

sing

le c

ounc

illor

war

ds

elev

en c

ounc

illor

s el

ecte

d fr

om

thre

e th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

and

on

e tw

o-co

unci

llor

war

d

In t

he C

ity

of G

len

Eira

, the

VEC

had

con

cern

s ab

out

the

appr

opri

aten

ess

of s

ingl

e-co

unci

llor

war

ds f

or c

aptu

ring

com

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

in a

den

sely

pop

ulat

ed u

rban

ar

ea, an

d w

as c

onsc

ious

of

the

need

to

max

imis

e th

eir

repr

esen

tati

on. U

nder

the

VE

C’s

prop

osed

thr

ee-w

ard

stru

ctur

e, w

ards

wou

ld b

e la

rger

and

cou

ld b

ette

r re

flect

br

oade

r ge

ogra

phic

com

mun

itie

s of

inte

rest

.

In t

he C

ity

of B

rim

bank

, th

ere

is s

ubst

anti

al c

ultu

ral,

econ

omic

and

ling

uist

ic

dive

rsit

y w

ithi

n th

e m

unic

ipal

ity.

The

VEC

con

side

rs w

ards

app

ropr

iate

whe

re t

hey

can

be d

raw

n to

ref

lect

thi

s di

vers

ity,

and

can

pro

vide

the

opp

ortu

nity

for

the

di

vers

ity

to b

e re

flect

ed o

n th

e Co

unci

l. T

he V

EC a

lso

cons

ider

s th

at m

ulti

-co

unci

llor

war

ds a

re a

ppro

pria

te f

or t

he C

ity

of B

rim

bank

bec

ause

of

the

geog

raph

ic

size

and

larg

e po

pula

tion

of

the

City

. S

ubdi

visi

on in

to w

ards

mak

es c

anva

ssin

g an

d m

aint

aini

ng c

onta

ct w

ith

vote

rs m

ore

prac

tica

ble

for

coun

cillo

rs a

nd c

andi

date

s.

In c

ontr

ast,

the

VEC

con

side

rs s

ingl

e-m

embe

r w

ards

to

be a

ppro

pria

te in

the

M

orni

ngto

n Pe

nins

ula

Shir

e be

caus

e of

the

impo

rtan

ce o

f gu

aran

teei

ng lo

cal

repr

esen

tati

on f

or t

he m

unic

ipal

ity’

s co

mm

unit

ies.

Th

e M

orni

ngto

n Pe

nins

ula

Shir

e is

div

erse

, w

ith

com

mun

itie

s w

ith

quit

e di

ffer

ent

need

s ad

jace

nt t

o ea

ch o

ther

. T

he

num

bers

of

vote

rs w

ithi

n ea

ch c

omm

unit

y of

inte

rest

in M

orni

ngto

n Pe

nins

ula

Shire

wer

e al

so s

uch

that

it w

as p

ossi

ble

to d

raw

bou

ndar

ies

arou

nd t

hem

tha

t co

mpl

ied

wit

h th

e 10

% v

oter

num

ber

vari

atio

n al

low

ed b

y le

gisl

atio

n.

The

repo

rts

from

the

se a

nd o

ther

rev

iew

s ca

n be

acc

esse

d at

the

VEC

web

site

–

ww

w.v

ec.v

ic.g

ov.a

u -

or b

y ca

lling

13

18 3

2.

In c

ondu

ctin

g th

e Kn

ox C

ity

Coun

cil r

evie

w, co

nsid

erat

ions

suc

h as

the

se a

nd t

he

stru

ctur

es o

f si

mila

r m

unic

ipal

itie

s w

ill b

e th

e st

arti

ng p

oint

. T

hrou

gh it

s ow

n re

sear

ch a

nd t

he s

ubm

issi

on p

roce

ss, th

e VE

C w

ill lo

ok c

aref

ully

for

fac

tors

spe

cifi

c to

the

mun

icip

alit

y th

at m

ake

its

situ

atio

n di

ffer

ent

to t

hose

oth

er m

unic

ipal

itie

s.


19

Tabl

e: P

rofi

les

of m

un

icip

alit

ies

Esti

mat

es a

s at

1 J

anua

ry 2

007

Met

ropo

litan

Mun

icip

alit

ies

Mun

icip

alit

y Ar

ea(k

mP2 P )

Num

ber

on r

oll

Num

ber

of

coun

cillo

rs

Num

ber

of

vote

rs p

er

coun

cillo

r El

ecto

ral s

truc

ture

Mar

ibyr

nong

P† P

31

48,3

11

7 6,

902

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Yarr

aP† P

20

62,8

24

9 6,

980

3 th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

H

obso

ns B

ayP† P

64

64,2

43

7 9,

178

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Bays

ide*

37

67

,702

9

7,52

2Si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

M

aroo

ndah

61

76

,287

7

10,8

98Si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

St

onni

ngto

nP† P

26

79,2

05

9 8,

801

3 th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

Po

rt P

hilli

p 21

80

,702

7

11,5

29Si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

M

oone

e Va

lley

44

82,7

56

7 11

,822

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Man

ning

ham

* 11

3 85

,748

8

10,7

194

two-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

Fr

anks

tonP† P

130

86,6

59

9 9,

629

3 th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

Ba

nyul

e*62

88,6

727

12,6

67Si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

Gr

eate

r Da

nden

ong

129

90,6

52

11

8,24

1Si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

Gl

en E

iraP† P

39

94,7

54

9 10

,528

3 th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

Da

rebi

n*

53

96,3

34

9 10

,704

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

King

ston

* 91

10

5,31

6 7

15,0

45Si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

Kn

ox*

114

108,

716

912

,080

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Mor

elan

dP† P

51

108,

995

11

9,90

92

four

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

1

thre

e-co

unci

llor

war

d W

hite

hors

e*64

111,

384

1011

,138

5 tw

o-co

unci

llor

war

ds

Brim

bank

P† P

123

117,

420

11

10,6

751

two-

coun

cillo

r w

ard

3 th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

Mon

ashP† P

81

119,

721

11

10,8

841

two-

coun

cillo

r w

ard

3 th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

Bo

roon

dara

60

12

5,34

7 10

12

,535

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

* un

der

revi

ew

P† P rev

iew

ed 2

003/

2005

20

Met

ropo

litan

/Rur

al F

ring

e M

unic

ipal

itie

s

Mun

icip

alit

y Ar

ea(k

mP2 P )

Num

ber

on

roll

Num

ber

of

coun

cillo

rs

Num

ber

of

vote

rs p

er

coun

cillo

r El

ecto

ral s

truc

ture

Card

inia

P† P

1280

41

,465

7

5,92

4 2

sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

1 tw

o-co

unci

llor

war

d 1

thre

e co

unci

llor

war

d Ni

llum

bik

433

45,6

75

9 5,

075

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Mel

ton

527

57,9

20

7 8,

274

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Wyn

dham

P† P

542

79,1

69

9 8,

797

3 th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

W

hitt

lese

aP† P

490

90,0

65

9 10

,007

3

thre

e-co

unci

llor

war

ds

Hum

eP† P

504

101,

620

9 11

,291

3

two-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

1

thre

e co

unci

llor

war

d Ya

rra

Rang

es

2470

10

3,23

9 9

11,4

71

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Mor

ning

ton

Peni

nsul

aP† P

723

136,

374

11

12,3

98

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Case

yP† P

410

143,

611

11

13,0

56

1 si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ard

5 tw

o-co

unci

llor

war

ds

* un

der

revi

ew

P† P rev

iew

ed 2

003/

2005

Regi

onal

Mun

icip

alit

ies

wit

h U

rban

Are

as

Mun

icip

alit

y Ar

ea (

kmP2 P )

Num

ber

on

roll

Num

ber

of

coun

cillo

rs

Num

ber

of

vote

rs p

er

coun

cillo

r El

ecto

ral s

truc

ture

Arar

at

4,21

0 9,

222

7 1,

317

Uns

ubdi

vide

d Be

nalla

2,

354

11,0

29

7 1,

576

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Swan

Hill

6,

116

14,4

20

7 2,

060

1 si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ard

3 tw

o-co

unci

llor

war

ds

Hor

sham

P† P

4,24

9 14

,703

7

2,10

0 U

nsub

divi

ded

Wan

gara

ttaP† P

3,63

9 20

,595

7

2,94

2 U

nsub

divi

ded

W

arrn

ambo

olP† P

121

23,3

40

7 3,

334

Uns

ubdi

vide

d W

odon

gaP† P

433

24,2

89

7 3,

470

Uns

ubdi

vide

d M

ildur

aP† P

22,0

82

35,7

54

9 3,

973

Uns

ubdi

vide

d Gr

eate

r Sh

eppa

rton

P† P

2,42

2 40

,276

7

5,75

4 U

nsub

divi

ded

Latr

obe

1,42

6 51

,724

9

5,74

7 Si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

Ba

llara

t 74

0 70

,757

9

7,86

2 Si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

Gr

eate

r Be

ndig

oP† P

2,99

9 80

,491

9

8,94

3 Si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

Gr

eate

r Ge

elon

g 1,

247

166,

874

12

13,9

06

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

* un

der

revi

ew

P† P rev

iew

ed 2

003/

2005


21

Rura

l Cou

ncils

Mun

icip

alit

y Ar

ea (

kmP2 P )

Num

ber

on

roll

Num

ber

of

coun

cillo

rs

Num

ber

of

vote

rs p

er

coun

cillo

rEl

ecto

ral s

truc

ture

Quee

nscl

iffe

9

4,06

4 7

581

Uns

ubdi

vide

d W

est

Wim

mer

aP† P

9,10

7 4,

074

5 81

5 U

nsub

divi

ded

Hin

dmar

shP† P

6,67

3 5,

102

6 85

0 3

two-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

To

won

gP† P

7,55

0 5,

381

5 1,

076

Uns

ubdi

vide

d Bu

loke

8,

004

6,24

9 9

694

3 th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

Yarr

iam

biac

kP† P

3,43

3 6,

596

7 94

2 2

two-

coun

cillo

r w

ards

1

thre

e-co

unci

llor

war

d Py

rene

esP† P

7,31

0 7,

216

5 1,

443

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Lodd

onP† P

6,69

4 7,

881

5 1,

576

3 si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

1

two-

coun

cillo

r w

ard

Stra

thbo

gieP† P

3,30

2 8,

909

7 1,

273

5 si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

1

two-

coun

cillo

r w

ard

Gann

awar

ra

3,73

2 9,

216

7 1,

317

2 tw

o-co

unci

llor

war

ds

3 si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

Man

sfie

ld

3,89

1 9,

402

5 1,

880

1 tw

o-co

unci

llor

war

d 3

sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Nort

hern

Gra

mpi

ans

5,72

8 10

,558

9

1,17

3 1

thre

e-co

unci

llor

war

d 1

six-

coun

cillo

r w

ard

Cent

ral G

oldf

ield

sP† P

1,53

4 10

,938

7

1,56

3 3

sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

1 fo

ur–c

ounc

illor

war

d Al

pine

P† P

4,83

2 11

,176

7

1,59

7 U

nsub

divi

ded

Indi

goP† P

2,04

4 11

,982

7

1,71

2 U

nsub

divi

ded

Sout

hern

Gra

mpi

ans

2,70

4 13

,271

7

1,89

6 U

nsub

divi

ded

Mur

rind

indi

1,

470

13,6

72

6 2,

279

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

rid

ings

Cora

ngam

iteP† P

6,65

2 13

,830

7

1,97

6 1

thre

e-co

unci

llor

war

d 4

sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Hep

burn

4,

404

13,8

33

5 2,

767

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Moy

ne

3,87

7 13

,980

10

1,

398

5 tw

o-co

unci

llor

ridi

ngs

Mou

nt A

lexa

nder

P† P

1,52

9 14

,764

7

2,10

9 4

sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

1 th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ard

Gold

en P

lain

s 5,

478

14,8

70

9 1,

652

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

rid

ings

Gl

enel

g 6,

210

18,1

68

9 2,

019

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

rid

ings

Cola

c Ot

way

2,

110

20,3

70

7 2,

910

2 si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

1

two-

coun

cillo

r w

ard

1 th

ree-

coun

cillo

r w

ard

Moo

rabo

olP† P

3,43

3 21

,016

7

3,00

2 1

four

-cou

ncill

or w

ard

3 si

ngle

-cou

ncill

or w

ards

Moi

ra

4,04

5 22

,113

9

2,45

7 3

thre

e-co

unci

llor

war

ds

Mit

chel

lP† P

2,86

2 23

,572

9

2,61

9 3

thre

e-co

unci

llor

war

ds

Surf

Coa

stP† P

1,55

3 25

,831

9

2,87

0 U

nsub

divi

ded

Sout

h Gi

ppsl

andP† P

3,29

5 26

,489

9

2,94

3 3

thre

e-co

unci

llor

war

ds

22

Cam

pasp

e 1,

747

28,0

54

7 4,

008

1 tw

o-co

unci

llor

war

d 5

sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Baw

Baw

4,

032

29,6

40

9 3,

293

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Mac

edon

Ran

gesP† P

1,74

7 30

,464

9

3,38

5 3

thre

e-co

unci

llor

war

ds

East

Gip

psla

nd

20,9

31

37,0

17

8 4,

627

2 fo

ur-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Bass

Coa

st

864

37,6

89

7 5,

384

Sing

le-c

ounc

illor

war

ds

Wel

lingt

onP† P

10,9

89

41,4

93

9 4,

610

Uns

ubdi

vide

d *

unde

r re

view

P† P r

evie

wed

200

3/20

05


9.5 Supplement

Knox City Supplement to the Guide for Submissions 5 April 2007

Due to a delay publishing the Preliminary Report, the VEC has moved some of the dates for the Knox City Council electoral representation review. The new dates are as follows:

Tuesday, 17 April 2007

Preliminary Report released

Based on the VEC’s research, including information presented by the public, the VEC formulates a series of different models for how the electoral structure of the City of Knox could be arranged. The models that best fit the VEC’s aim of fairness and equity of representation are presented and explained in the Preliminary Report.

Wednesday, 9 May 2007 5.00 pm

Closing date for response submissions on the Preliminary Report

Any person or group, including the Council, may make a response submission to the VEC about the Preliminary Report. This is your chance to present any additional arguments regarding which of the VEC’s models you believe best represents the voters of the City of Knox. Late submissions will not be accepted.

Thursday, 17 May 2007 6.30 pm

Public hearing

A public hearing is held at:


People who state in their response submissions to the Preliminary Report that they want to speak in support of their submissions may do so at this public hearing.

Monday, 4 June 2007

Final Report After considering any written submissions relating to the Preliminary Report, and information provided at the public hearing, the VEC prepares a Final Report making recommendations to the Minister for Local Government.


9.6 List of persons and groups making submissions

Preliminary submissions

Allan, L Bullock, S Cooper, D Gunter, A Knox City Council Knox Ratepayers Association Inc Landowners Rights Association Inc Maroondah-Knox Greens Proportional Representation Society van der Craats, A

Response Submissions

Allan, L

Beyer, A

Cooper, D

Crawford, S

Eastern Football League Inc

Gunter, A

Kenny, B

Knox Basketball Inc

Knox City Council

Knox Football Club

Knox Gardens Community Group

Knox Gardens Cricket Club

Knox Ratepayers Association

Knox, K

Maroondah-Knox Greens

Orpen, K

Peace, R

Penna, J

Proportional Representation Society

Purdy, J

Silcot, J

Wantirna South Football Club

0 1.5 3

kilometres

ROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLEROWVILLE

SCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBYSCORESBY UPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERUPPERFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREEFERNTREE

GULLYGULLYGULLYGULLYGULLYGULLYGULLYGULLYGULLY

WANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNAWANTIRNA

FERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLYFERNTREE GULLY

BORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIABORONIA

KNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELDKNOXFIELD

BAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATERBAYSWATER

WANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTHWANTIRNA SOUTH

LYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELDLYSTERFIELD

SASSAFRASSASSAFRASSASSAFRASSASSAFRASSASSAFRASSASSAFRASSASSAFRASSASSAFRASSASSAFRAS

Taylor WardTaylor WardTaylor WardTaylor WardTaylor WardTaylor WardTaylor WardTaylor WardTaylor WardCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1

Dinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardDinsdale WardCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1

Tirhatuan WardTirhatuan WardTirhatuan WardTirhatuan WardTirhatuan WardTirhatuan WardTirhatuan WardTirhatuan WardTirhatuan WardCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1

Dobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardDobson WardCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1

Friberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardFriberg WardCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1

Collier WardCollier WardCollier WardCollier WardCollier WardCollier WardCollier WardCollier WardCollier WardCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1

Chandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardChandler WardCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1

Baird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardBaird WardCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1

Scott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardScott WardCouncillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1Councillors: 1

Tayl

ors

La

Tay l

ors

La

Tay l

ors

La

Tay l

ors

La

Tay l

ors

La

Tay l

ors

La

Tay l

ors

La

Tay l

ors

La

Tay l

ors

La

Stud

Rd

Stud

Rd

Stud

Rd

Stud

Rd

Stud

Rd

Stud

Rd

Stud

Rd

Stud

Rd

Stud

Rd

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood HwyScoresby RdScoresby RdScoresby RdScoresby RdScoresby RdScoresby RdScoresby RdScoresby RdScoresby Rd

BlackwoodBlackwoodBlackwoodBlackwoodBlackwoodBlackwoodBlackwoodBlackwoodBlackwoodPark RdPark RdPark RdPark RdPark RdPark RdPark RdPark RdPark Rd

Marlborough RdMarlborough RdMarlborough RdMarlborough RdMarlborough RdMarlborough RdMarlborough RdMarlborough RdMarlborough Rd

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Forest RdForest RdForest RdForest RdForest RdForest RdForest RdForest RdForest RdSt E

lmo A

v

St Elm

o Av

St Elm

o Av

St Elm

o Av

St Elm

o Av

St Elm

o Av

St Elm

o Av

St Elm

o Av

St Elm

o Av

Hastings AvHastings AvHastings AvHastings AvHastings AvHastings AvHastings AvHastings AvHastings Av

Chandler RdChandler RdChandler RdChandler RdChandler RdChandler RdChandler RdChandler RdChandler Rd

Floriston RdFloriston RdFloriston RdFloriston RdFloriston RdFloriston RdFloriston RdFloriston RdFloriston Rd

Napole

on Rd

Napole

on Rd

Napole

on Rd

Napole

on Rd

Napole

on Rd

Napole

on Rd

Napole

on Rd

Napole

on Rd

Napole

on Rd

Kathryn RdKathryn RdKathryn RdKathryn RdKathryn RdKathryn RdKathryn RdKathryn RdKathryn RdStu

d R

dS

tud

Rd

Stu

d R

dS

tud

Rd

Stu

d R

dS

tud

Rd

Stu

d R

dS

tud

Rd

Stu

d R

d

All

iste

r C

lA

llis

ter

Cl

All

iste

r C

lA

llis

ter

Cl

All

iste

r C

lA

llis

ter

Cl

All

iste

r C

lA

llis

ter

Cl

All

iste

r C

lGeorge StGeorge StGeorge StGeorge StGeorge StGeorge StGeorge StGeorge StGeorge St

He n

de r

son

Rd

He n

de r

son

Rd

He n

de r

son

Rd

He n

de r

son

Rd

He n

de r

son

Rd

He n

de r

son

Rd

He n

de r

son

Rd

He n

de r

son

Rd

He n

de r

son

Rd

BayswaterBayswaterBayswaterBayswaterBayswaterBayswaterBayswaterBayswaterBayswaterRoadRoadRoadRoadRoadRoadRoadRoadRoad

Wellington Rd

Wellington Rd

Wellington Rd

Wellington Rd

Wellington Rd

Wellington Rd

Wellington Rd

Wellington Rd

Wellington Rd

Kelletts Rd

Kelletts Rd

Kelletts Rd

Kelletts Rd

Kelletts Rd

Kelletts Rd

Kelletts Rd

Kelletts Rd

Kelletts Rd

Wellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington Rd

Kelletts RdKelletts RdKelletts RdKelletts RdKelletts RdKelletts RdKelletts RdKelletts RdKelletts Rd

Nap

oleo

n Rd

Nap

oleo

n Rd

Nap

oleo

n Rd

Nap

oleo

n Rd

Nap

oleo

n Rd

Nap

oleo

n Rd

Nap

oleo

n Rd

Nap

oleo

n Rd

Nap

oleo

n Rd

Boronia RdBoronia RdBoronia Rd

Boronia RdBoronia Rd

Boronia RdBoronia RdBoronia Rd

Boronia Rd

Mountain HwyMountain HwyMountain HwyMountain HwyMountain HwyMountain HwyMountain HwyMountain HwyMountain Hwy

Ferntre

e Gully

Rd

Ferntre

e Gully

Rd

Ferntre

e Gully

Rd

Ferntre

e Gully

Rd

Ferntre

e Gully

Rd

Ferntre

e Gully

Rd

Ferntre

e Gully

Rd

Ferntre

e Gully

Rd

Ferntre

e Gully

Rd

Wellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington RdWellington Rd

Dor

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Do r

s et

Rd

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Burwood Hwy

Sco

resb

y R

dS

core

sby

Rd

Sco

resb

y R

dS

core

sby

Rd

Sco

resb

y R

dS

core

sby

Rd

Sco

resb

y R

dS

core

sby

Rd

Sco

resb

y R

d

Stu

d R

dSt

ud

Rd

Stu

d R

dSt

ud

Rd

Stu

d R

dSt

ud

Rd

Stu

d R

dSt

ud

Rd

Stu

d R

d

MonbulkMonbulkMonbulkMonbulkMonbulkMonbulkMonbulkMonbulkMonbulkCreekCreekCreekCreekCreekCreekCreekCreekCreek

FernyFernyFernyFernyFernyFernyFernyFernyFernyCreekCreekCreekCreekCreekCreekCreekCreekCreek

Wantirna South / ScoresbyWantirna South / ScoresbyWantirna South / ScoresbyWantirna South / ScoresbyWantirna South / ScoresbyWantirna South / ScoresbyWantirna South / ScoresbyWantirna South / ScoresbyWantirna South / ScoresbyLocality BoundaryLocality BoundaryLocality BoundaryLocality BoundaryLocality BoundaryLocality BoundaryLocality BoundaryLocality BoundaryLocality Boundary

Knox City CouncilMap of Recommended OptionNine Councillors, Nine Wards

Map Symbols

Legend

Parks and Reserves

Lake

FreewayMain RoadCollector RoadRoadUnsealed RoadRiver/CreekRailway Line

Locality Boundary

Proposed Boundary

Ward Councillors Voters Deviation Area (sq km)

Baird 1 11,738 -2.83% 9.152

Chandler 1 11,471 -5.04% 12.474

Collier 1 11,748 -2.75% 9.258

Dinsdale 1 11,189 -7.38% 8.388

Dobson 1 12,381 +2.49% 14.882

Friberg 1 12,516 +3.61% 9.131

Scott 1 12,835 +6.25% 12.344

Taylor 1 13,195 +9.23% 18.306

Tirhatuan 1 11,643 -3.62% 19.899

Totals for all Electorates 9 108,716 -7.38% to +9.23% 113.83

Average per Councillor 12,080 12.65

Map prepared by the Victorian Electoral Commission Vicmap spatial data provided by Department of Sustainability and Environment Parks digital data used with the permission of Parks Victoria. Copyright © 2007- State Government Victoria. Disclaimer: This content is provided for information purposes only. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy and authenticity of the content, the Victorian Government

does not accept any liability to any person for the information provided.

sssssssss

knox final report - victorian electoral commission · 2007-06-04 · knox is one of the most...

Documents