[doady]

Mississauga-Port Credit should include all of Port Credit.

Mississauga-Streetsville should include all of Streetsville.

The size are all wrong too. Here are my estimated populations for your ridings:

Meadowvale - 100,000
"Port Credit" - 60,000
Clarkson - 60,000
Malton - 40,000
"Streetsville" - 150,000
Erindale - 150,000
"Cooksville" -150,000

 

[Dan416]

Hey well it's easy to criticize. It takes effort to go and make a map. Go nuts people.

Exactly what part of Streetsville am I missing? Where do you draw the line between "Streetsville" and "Erin Mills" anyway?

 

[doady]

Hey well it's easy to criticize. It takes effort to go and make a map. Go nuts people.

It is also easy to see that simply splitting in half an existing riding with a declining population would result in two ridings that are too small, isn't it?

Mississauga-Meadowvale
Malton-Applewood
Streetsville-Churchill Meadows
Hurontario-East Credit
Mississauga-Erindale
Mississauga Centre
Mississauga South

 

[Dan416]

It is also easy to see that simply splitting in half an existing riding with a declining population would result in two ridings that are too small, isn't it?

Mississauga-Meadowvale
Malton-Applewood
Streetsville-Churchill Meadows
Hurontario-East Credit
Mississauga-Erindale
Mississauga Centre
Mississauga South

Now look who's cut Streetsville in half!!! Ain't that just ironic.

Oh and you also split up Erin Mills from Erindale. I like to keep them together.

 

[doady]

I think you really need to educate yourself. Education goes a long way.

http://www6.mississauga.ca/onlinemaps/planbldg/missplan/strville.pdf

 

[adma]

Mississauga will probably be getting 7 seats so it lines up well with the former towns/villages.

Technically, the only "former towns/villages" within Mississauga are Port Credit and Streetsville (and, as a "police village", Malton). So there's actually a lot of leeway as to where one can place the boundaries, "neighbourhood integrity" be darned. Sometimes, it's just not worth getting one's anal dandruff up over whether a "Mississauga-Meadowvale" riding includes something that isn't Meadowvale.

And because of its relatively small size and isolation, Malton will *always* be a problem, to the point where for the sake of riding-population balance you'd absolutely need to include part of Brampton--or, alternately, even Etobicoke, if you want to take a "Pickering-Scarborough East" approach...

 

[Dan416]

I think you really need to educate yourself. Education goes a long way.

http://www6.mississauga.ca/onlinemaps/planbldg/missplan/strville.pdf

I think you need to avoid relying on Mississauga planning maps for telling you where Streetsville is. I live at Creditview and Britannia. My home phone number stats with 905-819. A simple lookup will tell you that it's a Streetsville exchange. And since telephone exchanges follow the old town boundaries, I live in Streetsville.

EDIT: I realize it's not a very convincing argument since Meadowvale nor Erindale have their own exhanges

The following ARE the exchanges: Clarkson, Cooksville, Malton, Port Credit and Streetsville. And I think they should be the basis of the ridings. Meadowvale is pretty easy to carve out of Streetsville. And Erindale can be carved out of Clarkson and Streetsville I guess.

I don't suppose anyone has a map of the preamalgamation boundaries/the current exchanges?

 

[adma]

I think you need to avoid relying on Mississauga planning maps for telling you where Streetsville is. I live at Creditview and Britannia. My home phone number stats with 905-819. A simple lookup will tell you that it's a Streetsville exchange. And since telephone exchanges follow the old town boundaries, I live in Streetsville.

Believe it or not, telephone exchanges *don't* strictly follow old town boundaries, even if they're centred upon former towns. It's the same as with old post-office destinations: even if living W of the Humber River in Etobicoke earned you a "Weston" postmark, it didn't mean you lived in the former Town of Weston...

 

[Dan416]

Technically, the only "former towns/villages" within Mississauga are Port Credit and Streetsville (and, as a "police village", Malton). So there's actually a lot of leeway as to where one can place the boundaries, "neighbourhood integrity" be darned. Sometimes, it's just not worth getting one's anal dandruff up over whether a "Mississauga-Meadowvale" riding includes something that isn't Meadowvale.

And because of its relatively small size and isolation, Malton will *always* be a problem, to the point where for the sake of riding-population balance you'd absolutely need to include part of Brampton--or, alternately, even Etobicoke, if you want to take a "Pickering-Scarborough East" approach...

Well there are definite boundaries Bell Canada uses to determine whether a location is "Streetsville, Cooksville, Por Credit, Malton or Clarkson" so that is a starting point. As for Malton, I would include a lot of the Derry Rd area west of Malton or maybe the Airport Corporate Centre. Okay, that's not a lot of actual residents but it would make it bigger on the map.

 

[Dan416]

Believe it or not, telephone exchanges *don't* strictly follow old town boundaries, even if they're centred upon former towns. It's the same as with old post-office destinations: even if living W of the Humber River in Etobicoke earned you a "Weston" postmark, it didn't mean you lived in the former Town of Weston...

Maybe not strictly, but like I said, it's a good starting point assuming anyone has a map of them.

 

[adma]

As for Malton, I would include a lot of the Derry Rd area west of Malton or maybe the Airport Corporate Centre. Okay, that's not a lot of actual residents but it would make it bigger on the map.

Riding size is based upon population, not upon simple existing-communities or "what looks bigger on the map". If Malton's too small, then I'm sorry, bring someplace with some actual population in to balance everything out. It isn't like we're dealing with a Kenora situation here...

 

[Dan416]

Riding size is based upon population, not upon simple existing-communities or "what looks bigger on the map". If Malton's too small, then I'm sorry, bring someplace with some actual population in to balance everything out. It isn't like we're dealing with a Kenora situation here...

Riding size isn't based strictly on population. If it was, parliament would look very different. Certainly it wouldn't be fair for some urban ridings to have 60,000 people and others to have 150,000 people, but I'm not suggesting such large variation. It all depends on how many people live in all these different places. It's hard to do without the data. I'm just making educated guesses. It's a delicate balancing act of keeping communities together and trying to keep the riding sizes more or less equal. I remember back when there was Mississauga North, South, East, West. They've already started moving in the direction of basing on the ridings on the actual communities in Mississauga, with Mississauga--Erindale, Mississauga--Streetsville. Mississauga East--Cooksville is kind of a hybrid, and Mississauga South is pretty much the same as it was. I'm just taking the process to its next logical step. I'm open to suggestions, i.e. move a boundary over a concession here or there if it doesn't affect the integrity of the community the riding is based on.

 

[adma]

Frankly, because electoral boundaries are so every-ten-years-fluid, it's not worth overagonizing over "community boundary integrity"--and besides, it's only population growth + nomenclature that makes the present hierarchy of Mississauga seats different from (and perhaps more community-coherent than) the past. Mississauga South is already a de facto Mississauga-Port Credit (as it always was); while to reverse things, Mississauga-Erindale might as well be "Mississauga West" and Mississauga-Streetsville "Mississauga Northwest".

Indeed, if you really want to pick on a presently "questionably composed" seat within the GTA, it's Oak Ridges-Markham, which looks bizarrely gerrymanderish and consists basically of the edge-scrapings off neighbouring York Region seats--but that's probably also the classic "interrim condition" seat, i.e. as the leftover byproduct of explosive population growth, it'll be efficiently eliminated through further explosive population growth...

 

[Dan416]

That Oak Ridges-Markham riding does look like a mess.

But anyway, if you're not going to do it based on communities, then why base it on anything? Why not just number every riding like they do in the states? They have more representative districts than we do.

No, our tradition is to keep communities intact. If we didn't, then why have local representation at all? We could just vote for a party and have lists to fill the house.

 

[adma]

But anyway, if you're not going to do it based on communities, then why base it on anything? Why not just number every riding like they do in the states? They have more representative districts than we do.

Uh...really? More representative? Have you seen some of those congressional district boundaries?

That makes Oak Ridges-Markham look rational. (Though as a racially-motivated gerrymander, it is "based on a community", sorta.)