By Paul Whillans
“Oh, would some power the gift give us, to see ourselves as others see us.”
~Robert Burns, 1786
The longer one lives in a community the more difficult it becomes to be objective about that community. We live our lives with the same friends and family, often with the same routine—year in and year out. It all becomes so familiar. I think that it is often useful to try and imagine how others see us.
To that end, this past summer Environics Analytics and Maclean’s magazine published an analysis of the Best Communities in Canada 2019. They looked at the 415 most populous communities (a community was a Stats Canada “census subdivision”) in the ten provinces of Canada. They then ranked communities based on the following ten categories (weighting towards overall score in brackets):
1. Wealth and Economy (20 per cent);
2. Affordability (20 per cent);
3. Demographics (six per cent);
4. Taxes (seven per cent);
5. Commute (10 per cent);
6. Crime (seven per cent)
7. Weather (10 per cent);
8. Health (11 per cent):
9. Amenities (2.5 per cent)
10. Culture and Community (five per cent).
As the authors note, the whole idea of what is a “best community” will vary from person to person. I, for example, would not have weighted “Weather” so highly… but that is me. So, we can all quibble (or even argue vociferously) about this study. But what makes this so compelling is:
• It is absolutely unique to have a “national” comparison of such a small community as Huntsville. In and of itself that makes the result noteworthy; and
• Maclean’s magazine has readership of 2.4 million. So, 2.4 million people may have this opinion of Huntsville.
Overall Results
Huntsville was ranked the 367th Best Community in Canada.
This places Huntsville in the bottom 12 per cent of communities in Canada.
I have committed to myself not to editorialize on this article. But to say that I found this result shocking would be an understatement. Whether one disagrees in whole or in part with the methodology of the study, it bears consideration. To be publicly named one of the worst communities in all of Canada should start a conversation throughout the community and especially at the level of the local government.
As I move to look at the reasons for such a poor showing I will provide scores for Huntsville, and for comparison, the scores of our sister communities in Muskoka (Bracebridge and Gravenhurst) and for the six communities in Ontario which are most similar in population (Owen Sound, Wasaga Beach, Essex, Cobourg, Thorold and Port Colborne). For example, the overall scores were:
Best Community in Canada Ranking
The take-away from this table is twofold. The Muskoka region has itself some structural problems. And secondly, the size of the community is not a barrier to “success”. There are clearly best practices out there that create “best communities”
Factor 1: Wealth and Economy
The Wealth and Economy Factor is heavily weighted, comprising 20 per cent of the total score. It is comprised of local unemployment rates, household income and average household wealth.
On the Wealth and Economy Factor, Huntsville ranked 331, or in the bottom 21 per cent in all of Canada.
Factor 2: Affordability
Again, the Affordability Factor is heavily weighted to comprise another 20 per cent of the overall ranking. It is comprised of rent affordability, home affordability, average value of a house and discretionary spending.
On the Affordability Factor, Huntsville ranked 287, or in the bottom 31 per cent in all of Canada.
Factor 3: Demographics
The name of the third factor is somewhat misleading. Factor 3 is entirely about five-year population growth. The greater the growth the more points on this factor.
On Demographics/Population Growth, Huntsville ranked 224, placing it just about halfway through list of Canadian communities.
Factor 4: Taxes
In a category that most adults are interested in, Factor 4 tracks a range of taxes. Included in this category are provincial sales tax, provincial income tax (remember this was a national study) and local property tax.
Huntsville’s score against the rest of Canadian communities ranked it 133, to place it in the top third of Canadian communities. Significantly of note, taxes and health care were the best placements of the 10 factors.
Factor 5: Commute
Probably due to the nature of our small town, Factor 5 seems to be over-weighted in this analysis (garnering a full 10 per cent of the weighting). Communities received points in this category for the percentage of people who walk, bicycle or take public transit to work.
On the Commute Factor, Huntsville ranked 337 across Canadian communities placing it in the bottom 20 per cent.
Factor 6: Crime
I would imagine that everyone would agree that Factor 6, Crime, goes a long way to define the quality of a community. This factor is based on the five-year average of the crime severity index for the police service covering each community. The lower, the better.
On Crime, Huntsville ranked in the top 35 per cent of Canadian communities with a ranking at 146 out of the 415.
Factor 7: Weather
While I suppose some seek out communities with the “best weather”, as it is not a factor that anyone can do anything about, I think that this is over-weighted.
Compounding my skepticism, Huntsville ranked 330 in the weather category, to place it in the bottom eight per cent in all of Canada. (For those interested, without the weather factor, Huntsville’s overall ranking rises from 367 to 347; the latter still in the bottom 20 per cent across Canada.)
Factor 8: Health
In light of current discussions around future local health care provision, Factor 8 provides for an interesting view of how health care is provided in Canada. This is a largely objective measure including doctors (family and specialists) per 100,000 population, proximity to a hospital and wait times.
Huntsville ranked a decent 110 in all of Canada placing it in the top 25 per cent of Canadian communities.
Factor 9: Amenities
Factor 9 is kind of a catchall. Points are awarded for locations near a college or university, having a movie theatre in town and the number of restaurants per capita. (Mercifully, Amenities is not a very heavily weighted factor in the overall “Best Community” score.)
On Amenities, Huntsville ranked 251 to place it just lower than the midpoint of the listed communities.
Factor 10: Culture and Community
The last factor used to create the overall “Best Community” score is really about arts, culture and community involvement. This again is a factor that only contributes 5 per cent towards the overall score. I am sure that there are many who would favour a higher weighting, but probably just as many who would disagree.
Huntsville placed in the top third of Canadian communities with an absolute ranking of 127 on Culture and Community.
Summary
While the Environics Analytics/Maclean’s “Best Community” study is certainly not flattering to Huntsville (nor indeed all of Muskoka); and while the study may not be as rigorous as one may want, the results provided bear serious consideration. Firstly, it’s rare for a small city to be able to objectively compare itself to its peers across Canada. Secondly, it is what 2.4 million Canadians have read about Huntsville.
Council and all community leaders need to consider what it means to be ranked in the bottom 12 per cent of all Canadian communities. There are, after all, local solutions to the problems that this study suggests. We see other communities which are very similar (e.g. Wasaga Beach) using “better practices” to create “better communities”. My read of the data suggests that after the boom years of 20 years ago, growth is stalling in Muskoka (probably capped by the issue of affordability). Perhaps Huntsville needs to be more focussed and strategic in addressing these issues. (It is insufficient to simply write a Strategic Plan.)
Whatever the cause of these results and whatever the ultimate solutions, nothing happens without acknowledging and discussing the findings.
Paul Whillans, BSc, MASc, MStat, is a former government statistician and executive.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!
Horrible assessment. Thorold is an extension of St. Catharines and nothing more. Quite frankly it does not have much to offer. I grew up in Thorold and called it home for 30+ years. There is very little community vibe or pride. The downtown core has improved the past few years, but does not compare to Huntsville or many of the other communities being assessed. To be honest, this assessment is biased favoring So. Ontario communities. Take these ratings or whatever you want to call it with a grain of salt…. clearly not accurate.
Thanks for publishing this Paul, it is important for Muskoka residents to know about it. It should prompt more discussion, and hopefully better inform/influence Municipal/District government decision making. The more I think about their scoring system, both weighting and criteria, the more skewed it seems, as many of the comments here point out.
Here are my thoughts. First, I have lived in 8 different city’s/towns, including in different USA locations. I can say this, Huntsville is at or near the top of my list. What their system scores and how it weights things does not necessarily correlated well to what makes a community most livable and enjoyable. For me, that requires a safe, clean, healthy & active, friendly, supportive community (obviously some of this is much harder to measure). On these measures, Huntsville does quite well.
Wealth, economics and growth, at 26% of the score, seems over-weighted. That likely explains why S. Ontario has 9 of the top 10 in Maclean’s list. I have lived in some of the wealthiest and highest growth urban areas, including Dallas Texas and many GTA locations. Overall quality of life, in many respects, were lower than in Huntsville. Obviously, phase of life is important, as families need employment, and most/best job opportunities reside in the large urban centers.
That said, there are obvious things we can focus on to improve. Topping that list would be more affordable housing and more job opportunities for all seeking employment (which means more economic growth). On the flip side, ensuring those things that we scored better on need to be maintained: taxes and health care services. As Paul points out, we are in the top 25% on health care services, top 1/3rd on taxes. This should not be compromised. As pointed out, it needs to be understood in context of how it impacts our future hospital plans, and why the debate around what the local community can afford (tax-wise) for future hospital capital spending is so critical. Huntsville being in the bottom 21% on wealth/economy means there are serious limitations that must be factored in.
I should point out some missing important criteria from Maclean’s list: overall wellness (i.e. health) and clean environment measures.
I just read a report, based on moving statistics produced by a national truck rental company, Huntsville moved up to 24th spot for all of Canada.
I read an interesting comment in a book about the issues of climate change the other day. They say part of the problem is a lack of community perspective. They try to explain this by pointing out that not many people still live in the community where their parents are buried. In short we move too much. We search for an “immediate” gain and solution and in so doing we overlook or bypass the possibilities of improving our home area. Simply because that area, in many cases, is not our home, it is just a place to temporarily live and work and we fully plan to move to something that better fits our desires as soon as we can.
I don’t know if this kind of analysis has any bearing on a berg like Huntsville. I thought we had a lot of local, long term family history here so maybe this idea I read of is all whooy!
What I do know is for God’s sake don’t point out to the local governments that we are pretty good for taxes or they will screw this up in short order for sure!
Port Sydney was not measured as only the 415 Census subcensus communities in Canada were measured
In fact that is why I have highlighted Wasaga Beach as a comparable. It is in almost every way similar Huntsville but performed remarkably well
Indeed, Timmons, Tillsonburg, Cochrane all performed significantly better than Muskoka.
No, you are absolutely wrong, resources, size etc played no role in this survey result.
There was a remarkable consultant’s report (Starr Group) in 2002 to the District. (In my past, I have seen a lot of truly crappy consultants who take the money and parrot back what the hiring agency wants to hear). In 2002, they predicted the slowing of growth in Muskoka and the impending affordability crisis ( in my mind these were tough forecasts to make).
The Starr Group made a series of recommendations to the District and to the towns to mitigate the impending affordability crisis.
As near as I can tell not one recommendation was adopted. Or, certainly they aren’t implemented today.
I reported this not because I have either a strong opinion about Macleans; Environics Analytics or the absolute merits of ranking everything.
For example, I do understand that the real world difference between being ranked 25th and say even 40th may not be noticeable. But I have looked at the measurements used and I can tell you, that it would be wrong to write this off with some “soft” excuse when the town is ranked in the bottom 12% across Canada. This is obvious a real thing and should spawn real questions.
Wendy…..What I have found appealing about this study is that all the scores are based on objective and published statistics…..so for example, all the crime statistics come from Stats Canada’s Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics and are collected by every police force in Canada in exactly the same manner.
And all statistics and methodology are available in the Maclean’s article.
I certainly agree that this is not a “perfect” study but it does mean something, given how poorly Muskoka (in general) places.
Culture and community get 5% -really? Huntsville’s library rated in the top 6 in Canada. They have Algonquin theatre, colleges, and all the buildings look magnificent with painting of the Group of Seven. The place hosts the Ironman and so many other venues. People are flocking there. It’s true the taxes are wonky, and maybe the infrastructure and green energy programs could be updated, but it’s a remarkable, friendly and beautiful place to live and shop, and if you are lucky, to work. This is a skewed study.
Essex 65th? I lived there in the 70’s and couldn’t wait to leave there. The weather 12th? If you like hot and humid summers and wet winters. I doubt you could live there without an air conditioner. Must have been some amazing changes in the last few decades.
Of course, the results of this incredibly skewed survey are no surprise: Assigning 40% to wealth, economy and affordability torpedoes central/northern communities right off the bat. Why is there no category for environment? Any time I approach Thorold, I start to gag on the foul air. And how was weather evaluated? I assume that maximum scores were given to communities with one season, rather than four. I appreciate the fact that we’re a designated arts destination, and that our healthcare is outstanding.
In fact, if I valued this survey at all, I would update it by arbitrarily assigning 10% to each category. Other than knowing that our ranking would improve; I think that would give a strong signal regarding its subjectivity.
Such statistics produced by newspapers or magazines are commissioned by specific individuals or groups.In all of Canada’s provinces we have a lobby of people building houses, apartments, commercial and industrial buildings.The second powerful lobby is the groups associated with the sale of houses, apartments, commercial buildings, etc.The third place is occupied by lobbies dealing with renting houses, apartments, commercial buildings etc.The commissioned statistics do not have to reflect reality. Their aim is to suggest us where it is best to invest our money or move permanently to take full advantage of the benefits of cities or towns. The places that we are suggested are the places where these groups achieve the highest income.When Brampton and then Milton were built many years ago, these places gained the inspiration to be attractive. Every day, the newspapers were paying a lot of attention to them praising their architecture.Easy access to Toronto, etc.Today, we are offered places to live on route 400 from Toronto to Orillia. In a dozen or so years they will be offering us places to live along route 11 from Orillia to Huntsville.We can’t be fooled. We have chosen or our parents have chosen Huntsville as the right place to live, so let us live in this town and be happy that fate has given us perhaps the only chance to live in one of the most beautiful places on earth.
Jimmy , Hugh didn’t pen this!!!!………
The suggestion that Wasaga Beach is a better Community than Huntsville is Ludicrous !
How does Port Sydney , A Distinct Society , measure up
Unlike Hugh, I am not surprised by the results of this survey.
The disparity between regions has always been a problem in Ontario ,especially in the North where populations are declining.
Based on this study there are several communities in Ontario that have advantages and access to better services than we have in Muskoka according to the ratings. It’s very apparent that cost plays a factor in this analysis. What a great opportunity to see how we compare to other communities in the province. It would be nice to see comparisons in property tax rates across the province.. Which municipalities in Ontario run the most efficiently? The Province has been downloading additional costs and responsibilities onto the District of Muskoka since it’s creation. They include social assistance, policing, and affordable housing just to name a few. Is this the real reason why we now have District Government in Muskoka? This model does not provide services to the region in a balanced and cost effective manner as we have all witnessed.
This article reinforces the need for political reform in Muskoka. Our current structure with District and Municipal oversight has restricted Muskoka area municipalities from maintaining infrastructure needs, sewage treatment, roads, water and sewer and public transit. If the cost of maintaining two levels of Government in Muskoka is sustainable, why are we having such a hard time funding all these infrastructure projects that are community depends on. These problems exist throughout Muskoka as the demand for services is at and all time high. Our antiquated sewage treatment plant in Huntsville is a good example of the Districts inability to address Huntsvilles infrastructure needs as it’s population increases.
The cost of running the District of Muskoka and all of its municipalities has limited our ability to address the shortcomings in infrastructure throughout the District. We have antiquated health facilities that are years from breaking ground. We lack the services needed for the elderly moving to the area .We are not prepared for the multitude of issues facing everyone throughout the District. With more people moving here the impact on current services will be significant, and they are already stretched to the limit.
We have to travel to large urban centres for specialized services. But the elephant in the closet is our unaffordable housing problem in Muskoka. As the cost of housing and taxes escalate in this area encouraging the younger generation to move here or remain here becomes very difficult. Unless you expect them to live at home for their whole adult life. And if the District attempts to address affordable housing through more subsidies are taxes will increase significantly in the Muskoka Region but will are services improve?
Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result may not be the best option moving forward.
Interesting to note our higher standing regarding access to health care; confirms the argument for having two acute care hospitals. As far as the affordability issue, we, as Muskokan’s, have realized for a very long time that the housing and it’s affordability have not been followed based on the Strategic Plan..sorry to say.
I used to respect Macleans decades ago, but it seems that much of what they publish now is what I would call ‘clickbait’.
These assessments started with universities. Of course everyone wants to know what the “best” universities are, but is that even a fair statement? Despite the fact that my own alma mater was at the top of the list most years, I was disturbed by the simplistic approach to the statistics and influence these articles have on the general population.
I am also disturbed by how popular Macleans is. Obviously the formula is working, but at what cost? Surely they could spend their time on more useful reporting.
I welcome articles or studies that look at the pros and cons of Canadian institutions or places, but there is no need to create overall rankings – which spark controversy (and build readership).
There is a lot more to any town or city than a dozen rough statistics. How about a survey that looks at how happy people are with their town? I wonder what that would look like.
Most of the points on this list of the places I’ve lived or been around I disagree with. Wasaga beach you can’t tell me has a small amount of crime to justify the number they recieved, and it’s not exactly a cultural landmark either. Bracebridge shouldn’t come in higher on a lot of the items than huntsville either, the demographics I’m not sure I believe, and affordability same thing the rents are obscene in both towns and as for the culture and community I find that very insulting . I think this needs some work or perhaps some facts that show how they got these answers. Because I don’t believe it.