2015-16 Representation Review Guide for … · Web viewThe Act allows for a local council ward...

BOROONDARA CITY COUNCILApril 2019

© State of Victoria (Victorian Electoral Commission) 10 April 2019

Version 1

This work, Local Council Representation Review Preliminary Report – Boroondara City Council, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/]. You are free to share this work under that licence, on

April 2019

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Local Council Representation Review – Preliminary Report Boroondara City Council 2019

the condition that you do not change any content and you credit the State of Victoria (Victorian Electoral Commission) as author and comply with the other licence terms. The licence does not apply to any branding, including Government logos.


ContentsEXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................1

BACKGROUND.........................................................................................3

Legislative basis..........................................................................................................................3

Public engagement......................................................................................................................3

The VEC’s principles...................................................................................................................4

Developing recommendations.....................................................................................................5

PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS (PRELIMINARY)......................................................7

THE VEC’S FINDINGS AND OPTIONS........................................................15

Preliminary report findings.........................................................................................................15

Options......................................................................................................................................27

NEXT STEPS..........................................................................................28

Response submissions.............................................................................................................28

Public hearing............................................................................................................................28

Final report................................................................................................................................29

APPENDIX 1: OPTION MAPS....................................................................30

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF PRELIMINARY SUBMISSIONS...................................34

Page 4 of 44


Executive summaryThe Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) requires the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) to

conduct an electoral representation review of each local council in Victoria at least before every

third council general election.

The purpose of a 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. The matters considered by a review are:

the number of councillors

the electoral structure of the council (whether the council should be unsubdivided or

divided into wards and, if subdivided, the details of the wards).

The VEC conducts all reviews based on three main principles:

1. taking a consistent, State-wide approach to the total number of councillors

2. if subdivided, ensuring the number of voters represented by each councillor is within

plus-or-minus 10% of the average number of voters per councillor for that local council

3. ensuring communities of interest are as fairly represented as possible.

2019 electoral representation reviewThe current representation review for Boroondara City Council commenced on Wednesday

13 February 2019.

Current electoral structureBoroondara City Council currently comprises ten councillors elected from a subdivided electoral

structure of ten single-councillor wards. The electoral structure was last reviewed in 2008, which

made no changes to the overall electoral structure.

Visit the VEC website at vec.vic.gov.au to access a copy of the 2008 review final report.

Preliminary submissionsAt the close of submissions at 5.00 pm on Wednesday 13 March 2019, the VEC had received

two hundred submissions for the representation review of Boroondara City Council. These

submissions can be viewed from the VEC website at vec.vic.gov.au and a list of those people or

organisations who made a submission is available at Appendix 2.

Page 1 of 36

http://www.vec.vic.gov.au/



VEC optionsThe following options are being considered by the VEC:

Option A (preferred option)

Boroondara City Council consist of eleven councillors elected from four wards (three three-councillor wards and one two-councillor ward).

Option B (alternative option)

Boroondara City Council consist of eleven councillors elected from five wards (four two-councillor wards and one three-councillor ward).

Option C (alternative option)

Boroondara City Council consist of eleven councillors elected from eleven single-councillor wards.

Page 2 of 36


BackgroundLegislative basisThe Act requires the VEC to conduct a representation review of each local council in Victoria

before every third general council election, or earlier if gazetted by the Minister for Local

Government.

The Act specifies that the purpose of a representation review is to recommend the number of

councillors and the electoral structure that provides ‘fair and equitable representation for the

persons who are entitled to vote at a general election of the Council.’1

The Act requires the VEC to consider:

the number of councillors in a local council

whether a local council should be unsubdivided or subdivided.

If a local council should be subdivided, the VEC must ensure that the number of voters

represented by each councillor is within plus-or-minus 10% of the average number of voters per

councillor for that local council.1 On this basis, the review must consider the:

number of wards

ward boundaries

number of councillors that should be elected for each ward.

Public engagement

Public information program The VEC conducts a public information program to inform the community of the representation

review, including:

public notices printed in local and state-wide papers

public information session to outline the review process and respond to questions from

the community

a media release announcing the commencement of the review

coverage through the local council’s media

advertising on the VEC’s social media

contact with community groups and networks

ongoing information updates and publication of submissions on the VEC website

1 Section 219D of the Local Government Act 1989.

Page 3 of 36


a submission guide to explain the review process and provide background information on

the scope of the review.

The submission guide is available on the VEC website and includes a profile on Boroondara City

Council.

Public consultationPublic input is accepted by the VEC in:

preliminary submissions at the start of the review

response submissions to the preliminary report

a public hearing that provides an opportunity for people who have made a response

submission to expand on this submission.

Public submissions are an important part of the process but are not the only consideration during

a review. The VEC ensures its recommendations are in compliance with the Act and are formed

through careful consideration of public submissions, independent research, and analysis of all

relevant factors.

The VEC’s principlesThree main principles underlie all the VEC’s work on representation reviews:

1. Taking a consistent, State-wide approach to the total number of councillors.

The VEC is guided by its comparisons of local councils of a similar size and category to

the council under review. The VEC also considers any special circumstances that may

warrant the local council having more or fewer councillors than similar local councils.

2. If subdivided, ensuring the number of voters represented by each councillor is within plus-or-minus 10% of the average number of voters per councillor for that local council.

This is the principle of ‘one vote, one value’, which is enshrined in the Act. This means

that every person’s vote counts equally.

3. Ensuring communities of interest are as fairly represented as possible.

Each local council contains a number of communities of interest. Where practicable, the

electoral structure should be designed to ensure they are fairly represented, and that

geographic communities of interest are not split by ward boundaries. This allows elected

councillors to be more effective representatives of the people and interests in their

particular local council or ward.

Page 4 of 36


Developing recommendationsThe VEC bases its recommendations for particular electoral structures on the following

information:

internal research specifically relating to the local council under review, including

Australian Bureau of Statistics and .id data2; voter statistics from the Victorian electoral

roll; and other State and local government data sets

small area forecasts provided by .id

the VEC’s experience conducting previous electoral representation reviews of local

councils and similar reviews for State elections

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

careful consideration of all input from the public in written submissions received during

the review

advice from consultants with extensive experience in local government.

Deciding on the number of councillorsThe Act allows for a local council to have between five and 12 councillors but does not specify

how to decide the appropriate number.3 In considering the number of councillors for a local

council, the VEC is guided by the Victorian Parliament’s intention for fairness and equity in the

local representation of voters under the Act.

The starting point in deciding the appropriate number of councillors for a local council is

comparing the local council under review to other local councils of a similar size and type

(Principle 1). Generally, those local councils that have a larger number of voters will have a

higher number of councillors. Often large populations are more likely to be diverse, both in the

nature and number of their communities of interest and the issues of representation.

However, the VEC also considers the particular circumstances of each local council which could

be cause for more or less councillors, such as:

the nature and complexity of services provided by the Council

geographic size and topography

population growth or decline

the social diversity of the local council.

2 .id is a consulting company specialising in population and demographic analysis and prediction information products in most jurisdictions in Australia and New Zealand.3 Section 5B(1) of the Local Government Act 1989.

Page 5 of 36


Deciding the electoral structureThe Act allows for a local council ward structure to be unsubdivided—with all councillors elected

‘at-large’ by all voters or subdivided into a number of wards.

If the local council is to be subdivided into wards, there are three options available:

1. single-councillor wards

2. multi-councillor wards or

3. a combination of single-councillor and multi-councillor wards.

A subdivided electoral structure must involve internal ward boundaries that provide for a fair and

equitable division of the local council.

The Act allows for wards with different numbers of councillors, as long as the number of voters

represented by each councillor is within plus-or-minus 10% of the average number of voters per

councillor for that local council (Principle 2). For example, a local council may have one three-

councillor ward with 15,000 voters and two single-councillor wards each with 5,000 voters. In this

case, the average number of voters per councillor would be 5,000.

Over time, population changes can lead to some wards in subdivided local councils having larger

or smaller numbers of voters. As part of the review, the VEC corrects any imbalances and takes

into account likely population changes to ensure ward boundaries provide equitable

representation for as long as possible.

In considering which electoral structure is most appropriate, the VEC considers the following

matters:

the VEC’s recommendation at the previous representation review and the reasons for

that recommendation

the longevity of the structure, with the aim of keeping voter numbers per councillor within

the 10% tolerance for as long as possible (Principle 2)

communities of interest, consisting of people who share a range of common concerns,

such as geographic, economic or cultural associations (Principle 3)

the number of candidates in previous elections, as outcomes from previous elections

indicate that large numbers of candidates can lead to an increase in the number of

informal (invalid) votes

geographic factors, such as size and topography

clear ward boundaries.

Page 6 of 36


Public submissions (preliminary)The VEC received two hundred preliminary submissions by the deadline for submissions at

5.00 pm on Wednesday 13 March 2019. This includes 66 identical submissions that were made

as form emails through the ‘Boroondara Citizens for Better Democracy’ website. All submissions

can be viewed on the VEC website at vec.vic.gov.au and a list of those people or organisations

that made a submission is available at Appendix 2.

Submitter wanted fewer

wards

Submitter wanted ward

number to remain

unchanged

Submitter wanted more

wards

Submitter did not comment on

number of wards

Submitter wanted fewer councillors

5*

Submitter wanted

councillor number to

remain unchanged

2* 78

Submitter wanted more councillors

28* 2

Submitter did not comment on number of councillors

86^ 4 1

* Some submissions nominated a preference for more than one option.

^ This number includes 66 submissions submitted as pro forma emails through the ‘Boroondara Citizens for Better Democracy’ website. Where these submitters did not change the pro forma message substantially, they are considered to form part of the one submission. Individual names of all those who submitted through the website are listed at Appendix 2 under Boroondara Citizens for Better Democracy.

Number of councillors Increasing the number of councillors

Thirty submissions proposed increasing the number of councillors, 23 of which suggested an

increase to eleven and seven to the maximum of twelve councillors.

The main arguments for increasing the number of councillors to eleven was to bring Boroondara

City Council into line with metropolitan Melbourne councils of comparable size, with one

submission arguing that this change was long overdue. Some suggested that increasing the

number of councillors to eleven would increase the diversity of views and interests represented

Page 7 of 36



on the Council and provide fairer and more equitable representation. Some made this point in

relation to the increasing diversity among City of Boroondara communities and proposed that

eleven councillors would provide a better chance for more voices to be heard. There was general

consensus among advocates for eleven councillors that an uneven number of councillors would

help prevent tied votes and deadlocks during the Council’s decision-making. While supporting

single-councillor wards, but not specifying the number of councillors, the Member for Kew and

Shadow Minister for Local Government, Tim Smith MP, suggested that the VEC might like to

consider an uneven number of councillors, particularly to assist decision-making by the Council

in relation to the election of the Mayor.

Four submissions proposed raising the number of councillors to twelve to be consistent with a

large and growing population, with one submitter adding that this increase would assist with the

part-time nature of councillor roles. Another suggested that twelve councillors would better reflect

and represent communities of interest and facilitate improved representation for the diversity of

interests across the City of Boroondara. Three submissions suggested increasing the number of

councillors to twelve to accommodate an even spread of councillors across larger, multi-

councillor wards.

Retaining the current number of councillors

The majority of submissions, 80 in total, suggested keeping the number of councillors at the

current ten. Most of these submissions appeared to have been made as part of a broader ‘no

change’ campaign for this review. These submitters were generally of the view that the ten

councillors had worked well so far as a number and therefore remained appropriate for fair and

equal representation. Just over half (44 in total) of the submissions in support of retaining ten

councillors included statements copied or based substantially on either one of three email

templates. As such, twenty-four submissions made identical statements to suggest that the

current structure was ‘the best structure to meet the needs of the Boroondara community’;

thirteen submissions included the following same statement: ‘There is no major forecasts [sic] in

population growth or increased communities of interest that would justify more councillors’; seven

submissions made the identical statement in reference to the VEC’s last representation review of

Boroondara City Council in 2008, where the final report ultimately recommended retaining ten

councillors, and also questioned: ‘If it is not broke [sic], what are we trying to fix?’

In its submission, Boroondara City Council made a number of arguments in support of retaining a

ten-councillor structure: that there is no requirement in the relevant Act to have voter-to-

councillor ratios standardised across the state, and no legislative requirement for uniformity;

while Boroondara City Council has the third highest voter-to-councillor ratio, the VEC should also

consider the geographical size of the local council area, which is much smaller than other

metropolitan councils, including Brimbank, Knox and Frankston City Councils; and that there is

Page 8 of 36


no requirement to have an odd number of councillors, and it is not the prerogative of the VEC to

disallow a structure that has been approved by Parliament. The Council’s submission also

stated:

Having considered the number of voters in Boroondara, the Councillor/voter ratio and the

fact that there is no legal requirement to have an uneven number of Councillors, Councils’

view is that the number of Councillors should remain at ten.

Reducing the number of councillors

Five submissions proposed a reduction in councillor numbers. One of these did not specify the

number of councillors but was of the view that there were too many councillors on Boroondara

City Council, arguing that this prevented fair and equitable representation. Each of the others

proposed reducing the number of councillors to, variably, five, eight or nine. One submitter

suggested the minimum number of five councillors as a way to increase accountability and

facilitate greater collaboration among councillors. Another submitter proposed reducing councillor

numbers to eight, mainly in support of their preferred electoral structure (four two-councillor

wards), which was, in their view, a more democratic and responsive electoral structure. The

Proportional Representation Society of Australia (Victoria-Tasmania) Inc. (PRSA) proposed nine

councillors, preferring an uneven number of councillors to prevent tied votes during the Council’s

decision-making and to support an equitable distribution of voters across the PRSA’s preferred

electoral structure (three three-councillor wards). The same view was presented in another

submission, which proposed that nine councillors split evenly across three wards was the fairest

and most democratic way to represent the City of Boroondara community and its diverse

interests.

Twenty-six submissions did not comment on the number of councillors and were solely

concerned about the electoral structure. The 66 submissions received as form emails through

the ‘Boroondara Citizens for Better Democracy’ website also did not provide a preferred number

of councillors.

Electoral structure Based on the arguments and details presented in submissions, the electoral structure proved the

most pressing issue in this review. Similar to the VEC’s last representation review of Boroondara

City Council, the main point of contention among those who submitted to the review is between

single-councillor and multi-councillor ward electoral structures. The option of an unsubdivided

electoral structure received minimal support.

Unsubdivided

Five submissions proposed an unsubdivided electoral structure. One of these argued that such

an electoral structure was the best way to ensure that local politics within ‘one ward’ did not

Page 9 of 36


cause stalemates during the Council’s decision-making or conflicts over planning matters.

Another submitter felt that subdivision into wards confused the wishes of the majority of voters

and effectively divided the local community. This submitter argued that an unsubdivided electoral

structure was a better way to cater for the needs of the majority and prevented the concentration

of power among the influential and wealthy. One submitter felt that a subdivided electoral

structure was outdated, especially given that residents do not confine themselves to one ward

but travel throughout the local council area to shop, work and socialise. Two submissions argued

that applying proportional representation across the whole local council area was more

democratic and likely to facilitate a more diverse group of councillors. All proponents of an

unsubdivided electoral structure were of the view that it would improve representation by

requiring all councillors to serve the City as a whole, representing all residents.

Single-councillor wards

Based on purely the number of submissions to this review, the single-councillor ward electoral

structure received the most support. About half of all submissions preferring single-councillor

wards were either direct copies or based substantially on one of three template submissions to

this review. These submissions highlighted the benefits of elected representatives having close

connections to their local communities, being accessible and accountable to local residents and

understanding local issues. These views were similar to those presented in the submission from

Boroondara City Council and information distributed to residents by the Council through a

brochure and content on the Council’s website.

A large proportion of submissions preferring single-councillor wards identified local

neighbourhoods as the main communities of interest within the City of Boroondara and

recommended these be the focus for considering fair and equitable representation for voters.

These submitters expressed the view that single-councillor wards better captured the

distinctiveness of the City of Boroondara’s neighbourhoods. Indeed, Boroondara City Council’s

own submission outlines the various features of each of the current ten wards, including

parklands and open spaces, shopping centres, schools, transport routes and social/community

factors, in order to demonstrate the distinctive character of each ward. The Council argued that

the current electoral structure appropriately represents these geographical communities of

interest. Another submitter argued that large wards could leave some voters unrepresented if

elected councillors in the ward all came from the one area. Another submitter suggested that

larger wards had more varied needs and interests, which made it harder for councillors to

provide adequate representation.

Many submitters spoke to people’s personal experience accessing and working with their local

councillor. The VEC heard from submitters who had lived in the City of Boroondara for some

time, and benefitted from knowing and interacting with their local representative; submitters

Page 10 of 36


noted that they, or their community group, preferred having one easily identifiable and accessible

local councillor; and some also noted that they had previously lived in multi-councillor wards and

encountered difficulties knowing who to contact, and noted that their elected representatives

were less accountable to voters. Most submissions preferring single-councillor wards were of the

view that having one councillor to contact about a matter was superior to having to deal with

multiple councillors.

Another significant set of issues raised in support of single-councillor wards was the suggested

impacts that multi-councillor wards have on the workloads and working relationships of

councillors. Some suggested that multi-councillor wards entailed greater workloads for

councillors and increased the possibility of tensions arising among councillors if those elected

from the same ward disagreed on an issue. Boroondara City Council, along with numerous other

submitters, suggested that duplication or gaps were more likely to occur in multi-councillor wards

and where councillors did not communicate or share workloads as effectively.

Some submissions also argued that single-councillor wards reduce the likelihood of political

organisations to interfere in local issues and the politicisation of local council elections more

generally. Boroondara City Council argued along similar lines, suggesting that sectional interests

are less likely to dominate the Council in single-councillor wards, and that it is easier for

candidates to be elected as part of a voting ticket under a multi-councillor ward electoral

structure. Other submitters suggested that the presence of ‘dummy candidates’ in elections was

less common in a single-councillor electoral structure.

Two submitters, including the Council, provided maps in support of their preference to retain the

ten single-councillor ward electoral structure. Both maps suggested boundary changes to bring

Glenferrie, Junction and Maranoa Wards within the accepted plus-or-minus 10% deviation.

Multi-councillor wards

Many submissions in support of multi-councillor wards noted a general trend towards the

prominence of this type of electoral structure throughout Victoria and Melbourne, with some

pointing out that Boroondara City Council was among a small number of local councils with a

single-councillor electoral structure.4 This alone, noted one submitter, suggests that it has

significant advantages over the single-councillor electoral structure.

Numerous submissions made arguments relating to the diversity within the City of Boroondara,

the benefits of proportional representation to elect a more representative local council, and the

presence of communities of interest beyond individual neighbourhoods. Key to these arguments

4 Only two other metropolitan local councils (Knox and Banyule City Councils) and two interface councils (Nillumbik and Yarra Ranges Shire Councils) have only single-councillor wards. A number of local councils, particularly in Country Victoria, have only single-councillor wards or a mixed electoral structure of one or more single-councillor wards with one or more multi-councillor wards.

Page 11 of 36


is the idea presented in various submissions that larger, multi-councillor wards accommodate

and better represent a diversity of perspectives, including significant minorities.

Many submitters felt that the current Council lacks diversity and does not reflect the broader City

of Boroondara community. These submitters argued that multi-councillor wards facilitate a

greater number and a more diverse range of councillors, and one submitter suggested multi-

councillor wards would open the field to smaller groups and enable those with less financial

resources to stand for election to the Council. Other submitters were concerned that the current

electoral structure encourages parochialism and does not encourage councillors to work for the

whole of the local council area, see the bigger picture or represent broader, strategic interests.

Various submitters also pointed out that under the current electoral structure, candidates needed

only just over half of the votes within a ward to be successful, which, according to these

submitters, potentially leaves remaining voters unrepresented. Numerous submissions, including

those received through the ‘Boroondara Citizens for Better Democracy’ website, concluded that

proportional representation was the fairest and most democratic approach to counting votes, and

enabled a greater diversity of voices to be heard and represented. Likewise, the PRSA

advocates proportional representation to secure the representation of a broader set of voices

and interests than would otherwise be the case under single-councillor ward electoral structures.

Many submissions preferring multi-councillor wards suggested that communities of interest in the

City of Boroondara are not defined by the small geographical boundaries currently represented

by each of the single-councillor wards. These submitters also pointed out that communities of

interest are not based solely on where one lives, but also other locations, such as where a

person works, where their children attend school, and where they shop, socialise and exercise.

One submission identified those living in apartment buildings, which are spread throughout the

local council area, as an important but largely under-represented community of interest. Other

communities of interest identified in submissions included: different ethnic or cultural groups,

students, cyclists, various age cohorts such as children, young adults and older adults, and –

increasingly – those concerned about the environment. Furthermore, some submitters believed

that adopting a multi-councillor ward electoral structure would encourage people with shared

interests to work together and voters to show greater interest in the Council. One submitter

suggested that larger wards would help unite communities of interest, while a significant number

of submissions viewed that the current single-councillor wards are dividing these communities.

Critically, there was a strong view that multi-councillor wards provide voters with more choice at

elections.

It was also proposed in submissions that councillor workloads and their working relationships

would improve under a multi-councillor ward electoral structure. These submitters argued this

was mainly because work could be shared among councillors within each ward and that multi-

Page 12 of 36


councillor wards encouraged collaboration, rather than competition, between councillors. One

submission suggested that voters’ concerns would more likely be listened to by the Council if

there was more than one councillor representing them, and that councillors working

collaboratively would improve outcomes for all voters.

Although some submitters who preferred multi-councillor wards also acknowledged the

perceived benefits of having one point of contact in a local representative, they noted that this

was not effective when a ward councillor was absent, had a conflict of interest on a matter and

could not vote on that matter, or when the councillor disagreed with a resident on the issue. In all

instances, submitters felt that their interests were not fairly represented under the current

electoral structure. While Boroondara City Council has only had a handful of uncontested ward

elections over recent years, a number of submissions suggested that uncontested elections left

voters in those uncontested wards with no choice at election time. They argued that multi-

councillor wards would provide a wider choice of candidates at elections leading to broader

representation.

Numerous submissions noted that because the current electoral structure has been in place for

so long, candidates appeal to the same voters to secure their election. One submitter in

particular was of the view that the single-councillor wards has led to the loss of independent

candidates at the local council level while others suggested that the electoral structure

encouraged the prevalence of ‘dummy candidates’. Other submissions argued that multi-

councillor wards would increase the competition at election time and result in a fairer electoral

structure.

Finally, some submissions suggested that multi-councillor wards better accommodate population

change in the City of Boroondara and thus reduce the need for future ward boundary changes.

Submissions supporting multi-councillor wards proposed a range of models, as detailed in the

table below:

No. of councillors Electoral structure No. of submissions

12 Six two-councillor wards 2*

12 Four three-councillor wards 3

11One two-councillor ward and three three-

councillor wards1

11Four wards (no. of councillors per ward not

specified)1

Page 13 of 36


11One three-councillor ward and two four-

councillor wards2

11Three wards (no. of councillors per ward

not specified)2*

11Recommends multi-councillor wards but

structure not specified14*

10 Five two-councillor wards 2*

9 Three three-councillor wards 2*

8 Four two-councillor wards 1

Not specifiedRecommends multi-councillor wards but

structure not specified21

Total 51*


In addition, two submitters provided maps in support of their preference for multi-councillor

wards; one submitter suggested eleven councillors elected from four wards (three three-

councillor wards and one two-councillor ward) and the other submitter provided a model with

eleven councillors elected from three wards (two four-councillor wards and one three-councillor

ward). Both proposals were modelled by the VEC and were considered viable.

Page 14 of 36


The VEC’s findings and optionsPreliminary report findingsThe current representation review has attracted significant interest from City of Boroondara

residents and community groups, as well as Boroondara City Council itself. The VEC is aware of

the Council’s strong position on retaining the current electoral structure, and its active efforts to

mobilise the community to support its preferred outcome. The current electoral structure has

been in place since 1995, although boundary modifications have been necessary from time-to-

time due to steady population growth within the local council area. The VEC has heard from

many residents who feel that the ten single-councillor ward electoral structure serves them well.

One can understand the reluctance to change an electoral structure that has such a long history,

and supporters of the current arrangement have argued any change would simply be ‘change for

change’s sake’. Nonetheless, and particularly compared with the VEC’s last representation

review of Boroondara City Council in 2008, there is also a growing appetite among the local

community for changing the number of councillors and/or the electoral structure.

The Act prescribes regular representation reviews, at least in part, to allow an independent

reviewer to check-in on the functioning of the internal electoral arrangements within each local

council in Victoria. The process is an important part of maintaining a healthy democracy, and

similar processes occur in every electoral jurisdiction across Australia. It is encouraging to see

respectful and robust debate within the community, and—as the VEC also reported in the final

report from the last representation review of Boroondara City Council—there are clearly genuine

and passionate arguments on each of the factors considered through this review.

In acknowledging the high degree of community interest in this review, the VEC is aware of

public campaigns that have been run in support of two positions—one to retain the status quo

and the other proposing a change to multi-councillor wards. The former was, at least in part,

aided by messaging from Boroondara City Council itself, which made its position for ‘no change’

clear and through a public engagement plan5 distributed materials that encouraged local

residents to make submissions in support of the current electoral structure. The Council has also

stated that all the current councillors support retaining ten single-councillor wards,6 and indeed, a

number of current councillors made individual submissions to the review supporting the present

electoral arrangements. However, as only two of these declared their role as a current councillor

in their submission, it is not possible to be absolutely sure on the precise number. Another

community group distributed three email templates through its networks in support of the ‘no

change’ position, and these templates were, in many cases, copied or used to form the

5 City of Boroondara, Council Meeting Minutes, 25 February 2019. https://www.boroondara.vic.gov.au/events/council-meeting-monday-25-february-20196 Ibid.

Page 15 of 36

https://www.boroondara.vic.gov.au/events/council-meeting-monday-25-february-2019


substantial basis of various individual submissions. It is also possible that some of the councillors

who made individual submissions based their arguments heavily on at least one of these

templates.

As to the campaign in favour of multi-councillor wards, this appears to have been organised by a

local group called ‘Boroondara Citizens for Better Democracy’. The group established a website

that included a pro forma email submission facility.7 The scripted message, which advocated for

a change to a multi-councillor ward structure ‘as a more democratic form of representation’, did

allow those using the service the opportunity to change the form message, and therefore include

more information or further details about their preferred electoral structure if they wished.

However, only a handful changed the message to a substantial degree.

Submissions from these organised campaigns accounted for about half of all preliminary

submissions received by the VEC to this review.

Although the VEC is encouraged by community members participating in the review, and these

campaigns may well have increased the exposure and interest in the process, it can also be said

that organised campaigns using scripted or template messaging can distort community

sentiment. This is because these messages will not necessarily provide an accurate or complete

picture of how the community view fair and equitable representation by their local council. As a

responsible reviewer, the VEC looks carefully at each submission and considers the arguments

that submitters have raised, rather than merely taking a straw poll from submitters. The VEC’s

recommendations from these reviews are made by considering a range of factors, including

public consultation, the principles established by the Act and from ‘best practice’ for these kinds

of activities, a consistent state-wide approach, as well as the VEC’s own research and analysis.

Accordingly, the VEC considers all submissions and identifies viable models, options, and

ultimately its final recommendation according to the quality of the arguments in conjunction with

these other factors.

2015 Subdivision Review

In its submission, Boroondara City Council made assertions in respect to the subdivision review

conducted by the VEC in 2015. This report provides the most appropriate opportunity to respond

to those assertions and correct what appears to be a misunderstanding about the application and

extensiveness of subdivision reviews.

The VEC regularly monitors current and projected enrolments across all local councils in Victoria,

partly to assist its planning for these review programs but also as the election service provider for

quadrennial local council elections. In late 2014, the VEC identified that enrolment in Glenferrie

Ward was growing beyond the accepted 10% deviation from the average voter-to-councillor ratio.

In accordance with the Act, the VEC alerted the then Minister for Local Government who then 7 See https://boroondarademocracy.com/

Page 16 of 36


required the subdivision review. The review recommended minor modifications to the Glenferrie

Ward boundary to re-balance enrolment levels in time for the next Boroondara City Council

general election in October 2016.

In its submission to this representation review, Boroondara City Council asserted that the VEC’s

2015 review ‘does not appear to have recognised potential population changes due to the

increase in apartments being built and the ageing population in some wards with the consequent

decline in household numbers.’ The VEC refutes this assertion and notes that the subdivision

review considered building approval and demographic trend data, as well as public submissions,

to recommend a minimal change option that would correct the enrolment imbalance in Glenferrie

Ward. On 28 September 2015, Boroondara City Council ‘resolved to support the proposed

adjustments on the basis that they are clear and have low impact, as the affected area does not

contain significant commercial districts, schools or other social infrastructure.’8

The VEC’s final report for the subdivision review noted that the minimal changes recommended

were a temporary measure to correct the enrolment imbalance for the next general election and

would suffice until a broader response could be considered as part of the next scheduled

representation review (this review), which was in any case required by the Act to occur prior to

the 2020 local council elections.

Moreover, the VEC is not convinced that either the increase in apartments or population ageing

are the principal causes of the challenges facing the long-term sustainability of Boroondara City

Council’s single-councillor wards. Instead, it is a structural issue that single-councillor wards in a

densely populated urban council are less able to absorb uneven rates of population change.

Subdivision reviews are more common in the circumstance where even slight demographic

changes can trigger wards moving above or below the legislated 10% deviation. Further, when a

subdivision review is required, the only variable available to the VEC to correct enrolment

imbalances is adjusting the ward boundary; the VEC will have regard to the longer-term

sustainability of any adjustment. Nonetheless, and without the additional variables involved with

representation reviews, it is consistent with best practice for out-of-cycle boundary disruption to

impact only the minimum number of voters possible.

Boundary creep

The VEC has extensive experience conducting representation reviews and modelling ward

boundaries for local councils across Victoria, as well as providing technical (modelling) support to

the Electoral Boundaries Commission during redivisions of State electoral boundaries. Historical

ties to neighbourhoods, towns and villages, as well as pre-amalgamation local council

8 Victorian Electoral Commission, Final Report: 2015 Boroondara City Council Subdivision Review, VEC, Melbourne, Vic. 25 October 2015.

Page 17 of 36


boundaries, are apparent during many of these processes, and can influence the community’s

preferred placement of electoral boundaries.

Over time, the VEC has observed that the ward boundaries in Boroondara City Council are

increasingly less sustainable. Due to uneven population changes, the boundaries used in

Boroondara City Council’s ten-councillor wards will increasingly require adjustments in between

scheduled reviews to ensure they continue to meet the legislated voter-to-councillor ratio at each

general election. Although these wards may be defined by capturing different neighbourhoods

within the City of Boroondara, repeated boundary adjustments will eventually result in wards that

will no longer capture neighbourhoods and communities of interest within them that have

otherwise remained geographically stable. This undermines the meaning of the boundaries and

their original intention. This concern is evident in the two preliminary submissions that included

models of single-councillor wards. In attempting to bring all wards within the accepted plus-or-

minus 10% deviation, both maps propose boundary changes that invariably extend the

boundaries of slower growing wards in order to compensate for greater rates of growth in other

wards. At some point, whether it is now or in the future, should Boroondara City Council retain

single-councillor wards, the wards will extend beyond the community or communities of interest

they were originally intended to represent and become arbitrary divisions within the

neighbourhoods the wards then capture.

The need for future boundary adjustments, the increasing use of minor roads and other arbitrary

divisions to construct ward boundaries, as well as the flow-on effect that changing one ward

boundary has on other wards, creates uncertainty for voters and compromises the ability to

achieve fair and equitable representation for Boroondara City Council voters. This is contrary to

the outcome the VEC is seeking as a result of this review.

Number of councillors The VEC takes a consistent, state-wide approach to the total number of councillors and is guided

in its recommendations by comparing local councils of similar size and category to the council

under review. As the table below indicates Boroondara City Council has one of the highest voter-

to-councillor ratios of metropolitan Melbourne councils. While it covers a smaller area than many

of the same councils, its population and enrolment continue to grow.

Page 18 of 36


Comparable Metropolitan Melbourne councils to Boroondara City Council

Local councilPopulation

(2016 Census)

Number of voters at last

review

Current estimate of

votersNumber of councillors

Number of voters per councillor

Brimbank City 194,319 127,517 135,931 11 12,357

Boroondara City*

167,231 125,742 133,357 10 13,335

Moreland City 162,558 109,744 132,790 11 12,071

Monash City 182,618 120,779 123,695 11 11,245

Kingston City* 151,389 105,316 120,893 9 13,432

Melbourne City 135,959 104,929 119,595 9 13,288

Knox City 154,110 116,335 118,678 9 13,186

Whitehorse City* 162,078 111,384 115,486 10 11,548

Darebin City* 146,719 96,334 114,820 9 12,757

* The local council is undergoing an electoral representation review by the VEC during 2019–20.

The City of Boroondara is predominantly a residential area in Melbourne’s inner-east and is

about 5 kilometres from the CBD. The City includes the suburbs of Ashburton, Balwyn, Balwyn

North, Camberwell, Canterbury, Deepdene, Glen Iris, Hawthorn, Hawthorn East, Kew, Kew East

and Surrey Hills. The City houses a range of educational institutions, including a high number of

private schools and Swinburne University, and a number of public health-care facilities. It

includes major commercial districts, such as Camberwell Junction, Kew Junction and Glenferrie

Road. The commercial districts in particular play a key role in the local economy and community.

Future population growth in the City of Boroondara is expected to be modest, at 0.7% per year

for the period 2021-2031.9 The City’s current population is 167,231 with an estimate of 133,357

Boroondara City Council voters. The City has experienced sustained population growth over the

past two decades and has grown by 12,777 people since 2006. The City is estimated to increase

by about another 32,000 people by 2031. While not expected to increase at the same rate as

some other metropolitan Melbourne councils, population growth over this period will be steady

and sharpest in the suburbs of Camberwell, Hawthorn, Hawthorn East, while remaining relatively

stable in Ashburton, Balwyn North, Canterbury, Glen Iris and Kew East.10

Boroondara City Council represents an affluent and well-educated population, with indicators

such as median income, percentage of high income-earners, mortgage repayments, rental

9 Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Victoria in Future 2016: population and household projections to 2051. The State of Victoria Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, 2016. 10 .id, ‘City of Boroondara: population forecast’, .id https://forecast.id.com.au/boroondara

Page 19 of 36

https://forecast.id.com.au/boroondara


repayments and education attainment well above the state and Greater Melbourne averages.11

The City of Boroondara has some of the most affluent and well-off suburbs in all of Melbourne

and ranks as one of the least socially and economically disadvantaged local councils in all of

Victoria.12 Yet, as suggested in the Council’s own research, the City of Boroondara’s overall

ranking conceals high levels of social and economic disadvantage in sections of some

neighbourhoods, including areas in Ashburton, Kew and Hawthorn and which disproportionately

affects certain cohorts, such as older adults living alone, sole parents, people with a disability,

carers, public housing tenants, young people and individuals with limited English proficiency.

These neighbourhoods and cohorts no doubt present challenges to the Council in the form of

service provision, policy, planning and representation.13

The City of Boroondara has experienced some important changes to its social and cultural

composition, including a considerable increase in the number of people born overseas and

claiming ancestry other than Australian or English. This includes a high and increasing number of

people born in China, India, Malaysia, Vietnam, Hong Kong and Sri Lanka. At the same time, the

proportion of people in the City who were born in the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Greece and

Italy has decreased since 2011. Those born in China and those claiming Chinese ancestry

represent a significant proportion of the City’s population growth: in 2011 the number of people

born in China was 6,690 and by 2016 it was 11,063. Those claiming Chinese ancestry have

increased by 7,167 people since 2011 to 25,060, currently comprising 15% of the City of

Boroondara’s population. The increase in people from non-English speaking backgrounds has

occurred across the local council area, although is more pronounced in some suburbs, such as

Balwyn, Balwyn North, Camberwell and Kew. Interestingly, migrants from Asia tend to have

younger age profiles when compared to those from longer standing migrant countries, such as

England, Greece and Italy.

There has also been significant growth in medium- and high-density living, with much of this

concentrated in the suburbs of Hawthorn, Hawthorn East, Kew, Camberwell and Balwyn. While

building approvals have declined slightly from what were previously very high levels14, medium-

and high-density dwellings together comprise almost 45% of the total housing stock for the area.

In some suburbs, such as Hawthorn, medium- and high-density housing dominates (35.9% and

11 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census of Population and Housing, Australia, 2016, cat. no. 2001.0, 27 October 2017, www.abs.gov.au, accessed 25 March 2019. 12 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Census of Population and Housing: Socio-economic Indexes for Australia (SEIFA) 2016, cat. no. 2033.0.55.001, 27 March 2018, www.abs.gov.au, accessed 25 March 2019. 13 Boroondara City Council, Disadvantage and Social Exclusion in Boroondara, Boroondara City Council, 2015. Available at www.boroondara.vic.gov.au, accessed 25 March 2019. 14 According to the Victorian Building Authority and reported in the Herald Sun (12 April 2016), in 2015 Boroondara was ranked second in the state for the number of building approvals. (The City of Melbourne was ranked first on the same figures).

Page 20 of 36

http://www.boroondara.vic.gov.au/

http://www.abs.gov.au/

http://www.abs.gov.au/


40.4%, respectively), and Boroondara City Council supports increased housing density in and

around major commercial and shopping precincts.

At the same time Boroondara City Council is committed to retaining the character and history of

different neighbourhoods, preferring moderate changes in these areas. The Council lists 80

Neighbourhood Character Precincts, with each one accompanied by a detailed description and

design guidelines. There is much interest within the community around retaining the character of

established neighbourhoods, as well as concerns about over-development in more built-up

areas.

The main industries of employment are professional, scientific and technical services, health

care and social assistance and accommodation and food services. About 30% of the Council’s

working population live locally, which is similar to surrounding councils.

In summary, Boroondara City Council has one of the highest voter-to-councillor ratios of

metropolitan Melbourne councils, has undergone decades of sustained population growth,

contains and represents a highly dense population and faces significant emerging challenges

around residential and commercial developments, cultural diversity and increasing communities

of interest. These significant policy, planning and socio-demographic challenges, alongside the

already high voter to councillor ratio compared with other local councils, lead the VEC to

recommend an increase in the number of councillors for Boroondara City Council.

Electoral structureThe electoral structure was the main and most contentious area of community concern through

preliminary submissions, and most submitters proposed either single- or multi-councillor electoral

structures. Very few submitters preferred an unsubdivided electoral structure.

Electoral structure No. of submissions proposing this structure

% of submissions proposing this structure

Unsubdivided 5 3.5%

Single-councillor wards 84 60%

Multi-councillor wards 51* 36%

No preference stated 1 0.7%


While the above table indicates that most submissions supported a single-councillor electoral

structure, the VEC notes a significant increase in submissions preferring multi-councillor wards

compared to the last representation review. Submissions in support of multi-councillor wards

Page 21 of 36


increased from 20% in the 2008 Review to 36%15 in the current Review. As stated previously, it

should also be noted that about half the submissions supporting ten single-councillor wards were

identical or very similar to one of three email templates.

Nonetheless, compelling arguments were presented for and against single-councillor and multi-

councillor ward options, and these are outlined below.

The VEC examined single-councillor and multi-councillor subdivided electoral structures to

prepare this preliminary report. An unsubdivided electoral structure was excluded from the VEC’s

considerations as, like other metropolitan local councils, it is not an appropriate electoral model

for a densely populated urban area. The VEC modelled various subdivided electoral structures in

order to:

test the viability of potential electoral structures

capture geographic communities of interest identified through research and submissions

determine whether these structures would adequately represent the communities within

the local council area, while complying with legislative requirements.

The VEC considered a range of multi-councillor ward models, two of which are proposed as

viable options for the community to consider as part of their response submissions to this report.

The VEC considered a submission proposing a viable three-ward electoral structure, with

candidates elected from two four-councillor wards and one three-councillor ward. The VEC did

not believe this option was appropriate due to the size of the wards, which included enrolments

of almost 50,000 voters in both four-councillor wards. It was also of the view that the most

appropriate boundary separating the two largest wards in this model—Whitehorse Road—split

the Balwyn shopping district and could thus potentially divide communities of interest.

Option A: Four-ward electoral structure (preferred)

The VEC’s preferred electoral structure comprises four multi-councillor wards, consisting of three

three-councillor wards and one two-councillor ward. This electoral structure was proposed in a

submission supporting multi-councillor wards and was mapped according to the boundaries

provided by the preliminary submitter who used the VEC’s Boundary Builder application as part

of their submission. The VEC made slight boundary adjustments to the submitted model to

ensure that the accepted plus-or-minus 10% deviation could be sustained until 2028, boundaries

were clear and followed major landmarks or roads, and identified communities of interest would

not be divided as a result of the ward boundaries.

15 This figure does not include the 66 email submissions from the Boroondara Citizens for Better Democracy, which stated: ‘I am writing in support of multi-councillor wards in the City of Boroondara. Aproportional representation system is the most democratic way to represent our community.’ Inclusion of these emails as individual submissions would increase the support for multi-councillor to 56% of all submissions.

Page 22 of 36


This option captures population change effectively, with all wards sitting comfortably within the

accepted plus-or-minus 10% deviation. It also accommodates the forecast uneven population

change and all but removes the risk of future ward boundary changes in between scheduled

representation reviews.

Option A responds appropriately to the argument in favour of multi-councillor wards, namely, that

communities of interest are not solely based on where people reside, but also where people

work, go to school (or send their children to school), and where they exercise, eat and socialise.

The larger wards proposed in Option A capture broader communities of interest that exist outside

of immediate neighbourhoods.

Furthermore, the densely populated nature of the Council combined with the characteristics of

proportional representation gives candidates with a moderate level of support from their local

area a good chance of being elected.

A number of submitters who proposed multi-councillor wards raised problems with the

preferential counting system used at elections under the current single-councillor ward electoral

structure. The submitters were concerned that the counting method for single-councillor wards

could potentially leave a significant minority of voters feeling unrepresented. Multi-councillor

wards elect candidates through a proportional counting system, which gives multiple

communities within a ward a better chance of electing a representative according to the

proportion of support for their candidate. This means that multiple and overlapping communities

of interest are able to be represented within the one ward.

Other submitters suggested that they wanted a broader choice of candidates at local council

elections. In Boroondara City Council’s 2012 and 2016 general elections, six out of a total of

nineteen contested ward elections had just two candidates and four of nineteen contested ward

elections had just three candidates. Multi-councillor wards will generally provide voters with more

candidates to choose from at elections.

As one submission suggested in support of this option, multi-councillor wards cover a larger area

and do not fragment neighbourhoods. Option A aims to keep suburbs together in their respective

wards. Furthermore, with only four internal boundaries, Option A does not split Boroondara City

Council’s identified Neighbourhood Character Precincts to the degree that single-councillor ward

boundaries do. The VEC has also been careful to draw ward boundaries in Option A so they are

made up primarily of major roads and clear landmarks, rather than minor roads, splitting major

shopping districts within the local council area, arbitrarily introducing boundaries as other options

tend to do.

The wards proposed in Option A keep the major commercial centres intact and contained within

their respective ward boundaries. This was a major concern in submissions, including the

submission from Boroondara City Council. Indeed, this option succeeds in this regard where the

Page 23 of 36


single-councillor option fails, as it brings the Camberwell Junction and Glenferrie commercial

districts together into the one ward and does not divide the Balwyn shopping district down

Whitehorse Road as other proposals suggested.

Three out of the four wards in Option A provide an uneven number of councillors, which was

preferred by some submitters over an even or smaller number of councillors. The larger, multi-

councillor wards can potentially facilitate greater collaboration among councillors, the sharing of

councillor workloads, and a whole of council approach. This too was a major concern for those

submitting in support of multi-councillor wards.

A significant number of submissions argued against multi-councillor wards. A chief concern

amongst these was that any multi-councillor ward electoral structure would likely replicate pre-

amalgamation boundaries of the Cities of Kew, Hawthorn and Camberwell. Option A resembles

the old council boundaries to a certain degree, particularly those formed by Barkers and Burke

Roads. There are, however, some important differences: adjustments to the Burke Road

boundary were made to keep the Camberwell Junction commercial district contained within the

one ward and there are now two wards proposed for the area roughly corresponding to what was

previously the City of Camberwell.

Overall, Option A provides voters with more choice of candidates in elections, a greater

possibility of increasing the diversity of councillors and interests represented, does not divide

significant communities of interests, contains the major commercial centres within wards and

provides clear boundaries. It is therefore the VEC’s preferred option for this review.

Option B: Five-ward electoral structure (alternative)

Option B was developed from a submission that proposed a subdivided electoral structure of ten

councillors elected from five two-councillor wards. Given the VEC’s recommendation to increase

the number of councillors, the model was modified to incorporate eleven councillors and Option

B was developed as a viable alternative for this report.

The VEC is of the view that Option B—four two-councillor wards and one three-councillor ward—

balances the views of those advocating for local representation through single-councillor wards

and those in support of multi-councillor wards. It does this on a number of accounts. The ward

boundaries largely encompass key localities, including the major commercial districts, which was

a major concern in many submissions. In addition, the idea of local representation is retained to

a degree. As a number of submissions were concerned about knowing their local representative

and having one point of contact, one additional ward councillor may be preferred over two more

councillors in the three-councillor wards in Option A. In this option voters would have a greater

level of choice when contacting their elected councillor, at the same time retaining local

representation, albeit to a lesser degree than the single-councillor model. There would also be a

Page 24 of 36


greater chance for diverse views and interests to be represented when compared to Option C,

but not to the degree that Option A would provide.

On the other hand, the VEC accepts that proportional representation, which is the counting

system used in elections for multi-councillor wards and unsubdivided local councils, is less

effective with just two vacancies in an election. Furthermore, two councillors per ward provides

less choice to voters than three.

The five wards in Option B have less of a resemblance to the pre-amalgamation boundaries of

the Cities of Kew, Hawthorn and Camberwell, which were visible in Option A.

Finally, Option B responds positively to many of the arguments for multi-councillor wards in

general. Compared to an electoral structure with wholly single-councillor wards, this option

provides a greater chance of increasing diversity of councillors and interests represented, a

greater chance for significant minorities to be represented and a greater degree of choice for

voters. It also lessens the risk of future subdivision reviews because multi-councillor wards are

better able to absorb some levels of uneven population change. While Option B provides clear

boundaries, the boundaries may well be less effective than those used in Option A, as some

boundaries in Option B divide localities, such as Balwyn where the ward boundary intersects the

Balwyn shopping district. It is for these reasons that Option B is put forward for consultation as

an alternative option and is not the VEC’s preferred option.

Option C: Eleven single-councillor ward electoral structure

Option C is proposed as an alternative option in response to strong community sentiment for

retaining a single-councillor ward electoral structure. It largely keeps the current structure intact,

with only slight changes to the present boundaries to accommodate the additional ward. As such,

most wards in this option retain their character, though in all wards small sections have shifted to

neighbouring wards to meet the accepted plus-or-minus 10% deviation.

Many submitters, including Boroondara City Council, were of the opinion that having single-

councillor wards provided residents with local representation. This option provides residents with

that local representation, and along the same lines as the City of Boroondara’s present electoral

structure. It attempts to retain neighbourhoods as the basis of wards, but—as mentioned earlier

in this report—this has become increasingly difficult given the uneven population change. The

increase in the number of councillors to eleven has also made the wards even more sensitive to

uneven population change, although the VEC’s forecast population change show that these

wards will remain within the plus-or-minus 10% deviation for the short- and mid-term outlook.

Other submitters who supported single-councillor wards identified a range of beneficial election

outcomes that this option would also sustain, such as the chance for local candidates to be

Page 25 of 36


elected, a selection of candidates that is not overly large, lower campaign costs for individual

candidates and less chance of ‘dummy candidates’.

During the course of its review activities, this concern has been raised with the VEC in respect to

all types of electoral structure, not just single-councillor wards. The VEC has reported on this

concern at successive reviews and while there has been some attention paid to the issue by

Victoria’s Local Government Inspectorate, there remains no proper definition of a bona fide

candidate at local government elections. Accordingly, it is difficult for the VEC—as the reviewer

—to differentiate between candidates with legitimate aspirations of being elected and those

people who are nominated to steer preferences towards or away from other candidates. In any

case, and as mentioned, this problem is not exclusive to single-councillor wards and cannot be

resolved by changes to the electoral structure alone. Nevertheless, reviewing the election results

for Boroondara City Council’s previous two general elections (in 2012 and, most recently, 2016)

and excluding any uncontested wards, shows that the number of candidates nominated for

election has been modest at an average of 3.63 candidates per ward, which suggests that there

is currently not an issue with ‘dummy candidates’.

The ward boundaries in Option C are less clear than those in Options A and B, and the proposed

boundaries are increasingly made up of minor streets. In a densely populated local council like

Boroondara City Council, ward boundaries, whether demarcating single- or multi-councillor

wards, will inevitably cut across and potentially divide some communities of interest. However, in

single-councillor wards the chances of this occurring are far greater, and this is currently the

case with the Balwyn shopping district, which is divided along Whitehorse Road.

Finally, the VEC is of the view that Option C likely divides some communities more than Options

A and B. There is also a high degree of uncertainty in relation to the sustainability of subdivision

boundaries with this option. For these reasons and those addressed above the VEC

recommends this as its Option C for consultation and not the preferred.

Page 26 of 36


OptionsThe VEC is required by the Act to include a preferred option and may include one or more

alternative options for the electoral structure in the preliminary report. The VEC considers that all

the options outlined below offer fair and equitable representation for voters in the local council.

Please see Appendix 1 for detailed maps of these options.

Option A (preferred option)Boroondara City Council consist of eleven councillors elected from four wards (three three-councillor wards and one two-councillor ward).

Option B (alternative option)Boroondara City Council consist of eleven councillors elected from five wards (four two-councillor wards and one three-councillor ward).

Option C (alternative option)Boroondara City Council consist of eleven councillors elected from eleven single-councillor wards.

Ward NamesThe VEC has suggested ward names to identify the wards in Options A, B and C. The VEC

invites comments from the community on these ward names as part of submissions responding

to the preliminary report.

Page 27 of 36


Next stepsResponse submissionsAny person or group, including the council, can make a submission to the VEC in response to

the options contained in this report. Response submissions to the preliminary report should

address the models proposed by the VEC within this report. Response submissions must be

received by the VEC by 5.00 pm on Wednesday 8 May 2019. Late submissions will not be

accepted.

Submissions must include the full name, address and contact telephone number of the submitter.

Submissions without this information cannot be accepted.

Submission methodsSubmissions can be made via:

The online submission form at vec.vic.gov.au

Email at [email protected]

Post toVictorian Electoral CommissionLevel 11, 530 Collins StreetMelbourne VIC 3000

Public access to submissionsTo ensure transparency in the electoral representation review process, all submissions will be

available for public inspection at:

the VEC website at vec.vic.gov.au

the VEC office at Level 11, 530 Collins Street, Melbourne.

The VEC will remove personal information such as address, phone number, and signature, if

applicable, from all public copies. However, the full name and locality of submitters will be

displayed.

Public hearingThere is an opportunity for people or organisations who have made a response submission to

speak about their submission at the public hearing. The public hearing is scheduled to be held at

6.30 pm on Tuesday 14 May 2019 in the Zelman Room at the Hawthorn Arts Centre,

360 Burwood Road, Hawthorn. If you wish to speak at the public hearing, you must indicate this

on your response submission. If there are no requests to speak at the hearing, it will not be held.

Page 28 of 36


mailto:[email protected]

http://vec.vic.gov.au/


Final reportFollowing the public hearing, the VEC considers all the evidence it has gathered and publishes a

final report for the Minister for Local Government containing a recommended electoral structure.

The report is scheduled to be published on Wednesday 5 June 2019. Any changes resulting from

the final report will apply at the October 2020 general election.

The final report will be available from the VEC by visiting vec.vic.gov.au or calling 131 832 and

for inspection at the offices of Boroondara City Council.

Page 29 of 36



Appendix 1: Option mapsThe following maps are included in this report:

Map Page

Option A (preferred option) 31

Option B (alternative option) 32

Option C (alternative option) 33

Page 30 of 36


Page 31 of 36


Page 32 of 36


Appendix 2: List of preliminary submissionsTwo hundred preliminary submissions (including 66 submissions submitted via the Boroondara

Citizens for Better Democracy website) were received in total. Submissions were made by:

Roger Adams

John Addis

Jane Addis

Sandra & Chris Alexander

Lynne Baker

Bobbie & Warwick Ball

Sue Barnett

Frances Barrett

Bradley Beck

Suzanne Beck

David & Denise Birrell

Dinny Birrell

66 submissions under the group

‘Boroondara Citizens for Better

Democracy’

Boroondara City Council

Robert Brown

Elizabeth Burton

Benjamin Buxton

Sesto Cairo

Camberwell Junior Football Club

Canterbury History Group

Lawrence Chieng

Cameron Clark

Alan Cooper

Gemma-Jane Cooper

Sandra Cooper

David Crawford

Paul Dipnall

Michael Doyle

Mary Drost

Liz Drury

Jill Edmonds

Ken Eley

Ray & Anne C Elliott

Jack Fairlie

Ashley Fitzgerald

Lynn Frankes

John Friend-Pereira

Lynn Gray

Peter Hall

Dr J. K. Harcourt OAM

Rohan Harry

Phillip Healy

Jenny Henty

Syd Herron

Lisa Hollingsworth

Harry Hook

Page 33 of 36


Ian Hundley

Rosslyn Ives

Astrid Judge

John Kachami

Greg Kasarik

Sean Kellett

Robin Kelly

Diana Killen

Janice Lai

Nicholas Lamanna

Neville Lee OAM

Lighter Footprints Inc

Ella Lionetti

Cecilia Litchfield

Peter Main

Phillip Mallis

Chris Mano

Stuart Marburg

Sally Marsland

John McBeth

Peter McIntyre

John McLean AO

Denny Meadows

Joy Mettam

Priya Mohandoss

Rob Monaco

Charles Montano

Rocco Montano

Fred Moschini

Peter Neish

Angelo Nestor

Maria Ngo

Jack Nicholls

Lesley O’Gorman

Peter Papaemmanouil

Margaret Paul

Belinda Pearson

Wayne Perkins

Tom Ponya

Proportional Representation Society

of Australia (Victoria-Tasmania) Inc.

Charles Pruden

Riverdale Soccer Club

Jennifer Robertson

Lynne Robertson

Crysoula Robinson

Peter Robinson

Wayne Robinson

Glenn Rogers

Graham Ross

Lindsay Ruddle

Greg Scarfe

Graham Scott

Kirsten Scott

Leona Scott

Eugene Sibelle

Michael Sim

Kevin & Marie Smith

Page 34 of 36


Tim Smith MP

Jennifer Smithers

Jonathan Smithers

Sally Staddon

Cass Stafford

Michael Staindl

Robert Staszewski

Robert Stenshoult

James Stokes

Chris Stolz

Nicholas Talbot & Suzette Miller

Garry Thompson

Ross Thomson

Cheryl Treeby

Helen Tsoutsouvas

Judith Voce

Chew Wan

Ruth Wardlaw

Cynthia Watson

Elliot Watson

Lane Watson

Magnus Watson

Brendan Weibrecht

Jesse White

Renee White

Matthew Whitehorn

Erika Wilke

Fiona Williams

Maree Williams

Lorrae Willox

Edward Winkler

Rod Wooley

Page 35 of 36

This page has been left intentionally blank



Date post:	14-Apr-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	0 times

2015-16 Representation Review Guide for … · Web viewThe Act allows for a local council ward...

Documents