LETTER – The math of AAP population numbers doesn’t seem to add up
Determining the number of Electors, July 30, 2024, from the city of Kamloops. The formula for determining the number of eligible electors, presented to council:
The estimated number of eligible electors for the Alternative Approval Process is based on information gathered from Statistics Canada 2021 Census, BC Stats, and City records as calculated below:
1. Estimated population in the area 110,289
2. Estimated number of people 18 years of age or older 91,387
3. Minus the number of people estimated as not being Canadian citizens 6,257
4. Minus the number of people who are estimated not to be residents of
British Columbia for the past six months 260
5. Add the estimated number of eligible non-resident property electors 2,261
Total Estimated Electors, 87,131
6. 10% of the total number of estimated eligible electors, 8,713
Is there a math problem down at City Hall? Legislative services state that,
“The total estimated population of the jurisdiction was derived from information obtained from the Statistics Canada 2021 Census and the 2024 estimated population in Kamloops from BC Stats. The jurisdiction’s population growth rate estimated at 6.061% by 2024”
Therefore, the estimated population is calculated as 110,289”
Okay that’s pretty straight forward, Stats Canada have published that the population of Kamloops for the 2021 census was 97,902 and an increase of 6.061% would be 5,934, so the equation is 97,902 + 5,934 = 110,289, which is the estimated population of Kamloops in 2024. This is therefore the starting number which the city is using to base the AAP upon.
Wait, what? Is it just me or does that look a little odd to you too? Bob Gamble, can you help out here because this just doesn’t look right to me. Using the equation given this is simple elementary arithmetic, the answer is 103,836, this is the actual population figure if the 6% growth rate is indeed accurate, some 6,453 less people than the city’s well paid legislative services department have published, how did no one pick this up?
This took me all of a couple of minutes, the legislative services department had several months and they were off by 6,500! Moreover, why hasn’t anyone from city hall mentioned this publicly since I first pointed this out to them 4 weeks ago or the 3 other times I mentioned it since then? Three weeks ago whilst on a phone call with the author of this mess, I asked her to look up the population from the 2021 census for Kamloops. She read out the 97,902 population and I asked her how our population had grown by more than 12,000ppl in 3 years (97,902 to 110,289) if our population had only grown by the reported 6.061%. She answered that she couldn’t continue the conversation as she had a meeting to attend to.
Ten days ago, the 4th and last time we spoke, I was told that she errored and the 2021 census population number which the city was using was 92,442. After I picked my chin off the floor, I told her that that would mean we had an increase of 18,000 in 3 years, I may have said something in the vein of that being an idiotic statement, please remember this was the 4th time I’ve tried to correct her. Yes she did say she was trying her best, but after 4 attempts I was losing my patience. The conversation ended quickly. Just incase you’re interested, here is the census. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/dp-pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&SearchText=Kamloops&DGUIDlist=2021A00055933042&GENDERlist=1,2,3&STATISTIClist=1,4&HEADERlist=0
Nanaimo has had a series of failed AAP’s recently, earlier this year they estimated their voter eligibility number to be 78,990 (page 15) (https://pub-nanaimo.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=54785) some 8,000 less than ours, which I found odd since the the 2021 census saw Nanaimo with a population figure 2,000 greater than ours. Moreover, we had 1,000 more under aged kids meaning they had 3,000 more adults. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/dp-pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&SearchText=Nanaimo&DGUIDlist=2021A00055921007&GENDERlist=1,2,3&STATISTIClist=1,4&HEADERlist=0
So now I’m really confused, how did a city which had 3,000 less adults in 2021 now have 8,000 more eligible voters in 2024? Maybe all that saltwater is rusting their brains because obviously the math problem can’t be on our end.
MAC GORDON
ArmchairMayor.ca 
P(t) = p*o*ert
Whereas P = final population, po = initial population, e =Euler’s number (2.718281828459045), r = rate of growth (as a decimal), t = time.
I have provided an additional approach that council can review, as I believe it is a more accurate model than the one council approved.
Engineering does come in handy after all!
LikeLike
I would wager that they’ve also erroneously applied a discreet model to population growth, rather than a continuous model. Populations in reality don’t grow or shrink on a discreet basis.
When Kelly Hall disparages science while sitting in a council chair, it sets a very poor example for council, especially when basic maths appear to be beyond the capability of the high salaried administration. What exactly are the qualifications of the individual that came up with not only the formula, but the final numbers?
The need for a referendum has never been more evident than it is today. This process is illegitimate, without integrity and can no longer be considered as trustworthy.
But none of this shoddy math matters when the AAP is a smoke screen to cover up the preordained outcome that council seeks. But all of this makes glorious sense when the intent is to sidestep a sound democratic process.
LikeLike
I would attempt to get an explanation in person. Bring a calculator. Document the response. If the math isn’t correct and the breakdown is as you say, then the integrity of this process has been compromised.
If there really is an error, this would be an avenue to challenge any result as the advertised threshold for failure/success is not correct. The city itself stated it can’t provide a running total of weekly votes as that would harm the integrity of the process. If something as benign as that ruins the integrity, surely an error in the advertised maths is far worse.
Mac Gordon with another W. This would be a scandalous revelation in any city with a competent and unbiased media. In Kamloops we have mostly uncritical media acting as a PR arm for the COK.
Raise this in council, Mac! Erm, wait, it’s not on the agenda, so I guess we can’t talk about it. I guess you can’t even suggest that we talk about it during a future council meeting, because you can only suggest to talk about something if it’s on the agenda. But you can email council! Erm, wait, they don’t reply to you if you have anything critical to say.
Kamloops, this is our hooOoOme.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cancel the AAP and do a referendumb. All one has to do is add YES’s separately from the NO’s, (could be a problem) but the answer should be obvious.
LikeLike
Thanks for your research, Mac.
I did a search for the 2022 municipal election in Kamloops. This is a number from CIVICINFOBC:
Estimated eligible voters: 76,327
The Chief Elections Officer was Amanda Passmore at 250-828-3718
This is just a suggestion Mac and the other readers:
Take that number and extrapolate to today’s date to calculate the estimated number of eligible voters in Kamloops. From that number, calculate the value which corresponds to 10 percent of eligible voters to meet the AAP requirement.
It’s late and I’m tired and I don’t want to get involved with the math tonight.
Carry on, Mac. Thanks again.
LikeLike