The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

id )mu vote in the last municipal election? mm 2010 mm turnout in Yuri: Region reaming from a low of 28.8 per com [1} Richmond Hill to a high of 49.9 pet cent in King 'I'mmship. chanws are. you didn't. Odds am you didn't cast a bal- k)! in the municipal election prior to that either. Enter thefink Region Media Gmup’s Big 5-0 Project. which has set the ambitious goal of boost- ingvoter turnout in the 3mm; W1“ cover up to 50 per cent thmugh an ongoing series that details what [municipal gmvrmm-m "Ls and how it impacts you on a daily befits. Don't beat ytmrself up What's done is done. buuhe Head of poor voter participation at the municipal level news to change J for 20 l 4. W311 also be working towani our targm via our variou“ 0"“an nity links panels and thmugh the use of council mpon cards ; It's a [all urder. but it many shouldn't be, After all. we mly on the wrvicos pnwided by municipal gmrm’ men! wcry day. but often take them for granted. Staff fmm yum local munici- pality mammins asidential streets and skit-walks and helps to kl‘t‘p our parks and other public spares. neat and tidy. while the regmnal ker of gmmmc-m is tasde with calla-ting your garbage and recy- cling. running the transit service and taking mm of mgional made; such as Yunge amongst mher respxmsibilitkfi Both are aLw Chiltng with drafting budgets for the year and mtahiishing a pmpeny tax rate with which to fund them. Given the financial and quality- of-lifc impacts. ynu would (‘xpem vmer turnout m be much higher. 50 why isn’t it? Phat “HP! participation rates at the municipal level can b:- owed to a number of factors. York Uni- w-mity political suicmté punk-55m Robert MacDermid explained. For starters. many people sim- ply don't fallow their municipal council enough to really get inter- ested or cam about its decisinm. he adding another likely culprit is the pace at which our modern always-conm‘ctm moiety mchs. Pivple am busy with wmk. rummming and family commit - ments. he When you add all of those things together. there's not a lot of time left for polith Wewant to find out why you don’t vote spam (Chung. mm BY SEAN PEARCE Natumlly. all M mat changes for people when an issue comes along that dirwfly affects them or their twighbourhoodr he said. adding affluent areas ténd to be more active. In an effort to counter the sta- tistics. municipalities across the pmvinur hegve tried a variety of (hi fetenl ways to bring more people out on election day. but most have met with limited success. Mr. MacDermid said. MacDermld said. Ajax. for example. tried several means to encourage more partici- pation on the part of the electorâ€" ate. up to and including a home- town celebrity-studded video on You'l‘ube. but saw its voter turnout rise just 2 per cent to 25.4 per cent in 20") forthe effort. he Closer to home. Markham tried 0th voting and mall-in ballots during the last election. but actu- ally saw voter turnout deem-axe slightly. [he reality is. more ways to Larger municipalities often have significant M in their recent past. which brings an influx of new residents who may not yet be familiar with the politi. cal landscape in their new homes. he So how do we fix it? Experts have suggestul many ways to increase engagement. from inan political parties. to give voters a better sense of where candidates stand and com- pulmry voting to changing the format of the ballot. [he reality is. mote ways 10 vote mm always equate to V mom vmevs. Mr. MacDel'mki said “When mmicipah‘des do thing like lntcma voting. people who atways wrluld have voted THE BIG 5-0 PROJECI AIMS TD BOOST VOYER TURNUUI IN 2014 anyway lend to use them." he “It doesn't usually attract new penka It's difficult to say for sum why that is. Mr. Maclkrmid said. but one reason may be smaller oom- munitics just tend to be more focused 0n local issues. Anotth interesting piece of the puule is voter tumouts tend to be somewhat higher in rural munici- palities. compared to urban (mes. F0: Mr. MacDermid. one of the easiest fixes it to simply move municipal election day in Ontario from aTMesdayloaSatwdayto make it easier for people to find the time to vote. Anmhvr solution. hr summit-(l, is m cmun‘ prmgx'cliw vntvrs arv infomwd of the upcoming cloc- llnn and when and whom {hm can (as! a ballm. Unlike the pruâ€" vlncial and federal mtcr registries. municipal lists n-ly on data lmm the Municipal l’mpcrty Axum- ment (bnxnatlon w(MPML) and the inlurmaliun can be badly mu of dam- he especially when n comes to tenants. It's one of the reasons Rich- mond Hill intends to make exten- sivv use of soda! media and nlhvr tools to k: people know thc value of ensuring Ihvir infomlalion is curred and that municipal vnting day is Oct. 27. 2014. he said. add- ing he suspects nther towns and Cities acmxs the pnm'ncv will do ’llw lists frum MPM‘. .m-n'l always perfect Richmond Hill projects and support services managt-r Su‘phvn O'Brien said. but noted people also have a mpnnsibility tn (-nsum their records an- kept up to date. As with some nf its noighlmun. Richmund Hill explored the idea of onlin mung. but eventually decided against it "I would argue that. dartan and voter tumouts are tied to issues and candidates,’ he In any event. Mr. O'Brien said he ultimately believes it will be the "mum of the day or the candidates themselves that will determine if people vote en masse. "Wc can sci when people vote. whore pcoplv mic and how pm- plc vole. hut wv can't dictau- why." 'lhe why Is Huh-Q1131 ditficull 'lhv munit‘inul vlot‘tinn raw in~ Vaughan saw "It'll mayor Lind-I lackwn and utth incumbents rvplacui. hut won that dramatit' tum of (-wnh translated tn just}! 2.5-pcr-cont IiWfl‘flSC‘ in the votct tumnut. Another mntentious race that ended In the defeat of incumbents. Aurora. saw a men- 0.5-pcrâ€"c0nt uptake in the numhw uf ballots (fast. Still. politicians would be unwia‘ tn assumi- law turnouts in their unmnunities equate to a content populace. MI. Maclx‘nnid The Big 54) hum-s to change that. If you share that ideal. you're welcnnw m join «me of our (10m munhy links panels. > Auto“: 38.5 percent (up m 38 pet can in 2006) ’ p mum West Gwiimbmy. 39 pei cent (about the same in 2006) D East Gwiliimbury: 37.44 pm cent (up how: 36.39 per gem in 2%) v (roujna. 35 pet cent (Wham from 2006) D King: 49.9 pe! cent (w 9W from 49.84 pet can! in 2006) v Markham: 35.5 pet cent (down from 37.6 pol cent in 2N6) b Newmarket: 32.6 pet cent (down from 35 pev (em in 2006) b Rkhmond Hfll: 28.8 p91ch (up from 25.6 pet (em in 2006) » Vaughan: 40.5 p91 (em (up from 38 pa! cent in 2006) > Whitdwrch-Stouflvilkzfi per cent (und'mged from 2006) D To find out more or to sham your thoughts on this at any othev local issue, e'maa Sun-Yribune editov Jim Mason at Wmn 2010 VOTER TUBNOUT