Victoria Vision: A Conversation on Amalgamation on the CHEK 6 Facebook Page

I am posting this here because it is so easy to lose interesting conversations on Facbook. The responses are overwhelmingly positive.

CHEK News: Official Page

Wednesday, June 26 at 12:00pm

CHEK Point Question: Would you vote for amalgamation in the capital region? Why or why not?

2Unlike · · Share

You, Aaron Hall, Rod Phillips and 13 others like this.
Ronald C Schinners it should happen

Like · Reply · 2 · Yesterday at 12:05pmReply
Adam Thompson It all one place any ways or close to

Like · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 12:05pm via mobileReply
Serena Devlin Of course. Why are we paying 13, or 14 (so many I've lost count) mayors, fire depts, police depts, municipal employees, etc. there's always stupid hoops to jump from municipality to municipality. I say it's TIME to amalgamate. I can't see how it can be a bad thing.

Like · Reply · 9 · Yesterday at 12:06pm via mobileReply

Dan Iel We might be paying for 13 different fire and police departments, but even with amalgamation we'd still need the same number of police officers and firemen, so where's the cost savings?

Like · 11:06am (about an hour ago)Reply

Jacqui Ward Absolutely. Especially after how well one city government worked for Calgary during the flooding. I shudder to think about all the municipal squabbling about who should do what in an emergency here.

Like · Reply · 5 · Yesterday at 12:06pmReply
Kimberly Salmon Yes, why would we have all these different municipalities? Waste of money, time and resources.

Like · Reply · 4 · Yesterday at 12:07pm via mobileReply
Morgan D. O'Donnell Definitely save money for Sewage treatment...

Like · Reply · Yesterday at 12:08pm via mobileReply
Susan Johnston Yes. I would like to see our police, fire,and infrastructure costs share throughout the region because we all use these services.

Like · Reply · 3 · Yesterday at 12:09pmReply
Jonahs KingRobot Farrell Yes

Like · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 12:10pm via mobileReply
Serena Devlin Also, I live in a small strip of saanich, in the oak bay/Victoria border. To have to get anything done with the municipality of Saanich, I have to go halfway across the city to do it. My road is falling apart, I don't see many saanich workers around doing upkeep like Victoria and oak bay, they just send out the street sweeper once in awhile. It's like saanich has forgotten we even exist out here.

Like · Reply · 3 · Yesterday at 12:10pm via mobileReply

Susan Jones Serena, here are 13 more reasons for you - please share, we need the support and help. Mayor & many Council have stated they don't agree, have not offered up any solid reasons why they disagree other than why would they 'tear apart' their municipality. They are not likely to put the question on your voting ballot for you to vote on in 2014 -http://amalgamationyes.ca/13-reasons unless 100% of Saanich screams for it to be there.

Amalgamation Yes | 13 Reasons
amalgamationyes.ca
Amalgamation Yes | Greater Victoria | 13 Reasons

Like · 1 · 6:09am (6 hours ago)Reply
Serena Devlin Done and done! Thanks for the info!

Like · 8:10am (4 hours ago) via mobileReply

Rod Phillips Yes - because we as a region are stronger and more able to tackle todays and tomorrows challenges together, than apart.

Like · Reply · 2 · Yesterday at 12:12pm via mobileReply
Donna Weitz yes, for example, the deer discussion - same words, different venues, delayed decisions. $$$ down the drain.

Like · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 12:13pmReply
Gidget Dee McLeod It works for Port Alberni/Alberni.. I recommend it!

Like · Reply · Yesterday at 12:15pmReply
Carey Mclauchlin Yes

Like · Reply · Yesterday at 12:15pmReply
Stuart Eastwood We currently have more elected officials representing Greater Victoria than there are MLAs representing the entire Province of British Columbia- Amalgamation is long overdue- By way of example, Calgary is well over 1M people and functions very well with the one mayor- one police service, one fire service....

Like · Reply · 10 · Yesterday at 12:21pmReply
Trevor Newnham No

Like · Reply · Yesterday at 12:21pm via mobileReply
Berek Christian Yes. Does anybody realize how much money gets wasted having 13 sets of everything?

Like · Reply · 4 · Wednesday, June 26 at 12:25pm (23 hours ago)via mobileReply
Michael W N Turgeon Yes ! Why ? A bigger tax base.

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 12:26pm (23 hours ago)via mobileReply
Josh Steffler no,Amalgamation will be like having the CRD in charge of everything...

NO THANKS

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 12:29pm (23 hours ago)Reply

Stuart Eastwood The difference being that the tax payer will have a vote as to how our money is spent- unlike the current CRD system.

Like · 7 · Wednesday, June 26 at 12:32pm (23 hours ago)Reply
Bernard Von Schulmann Does mean you favour breaking Victoria and Saanich into 8 to 10 more municipalities?

Like · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:43pm (18 hours ago)Reply
View more replies

Mike-Angela Erickson yes, definitely

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 12:30pm (23 hours ago)Reply
Richard Gordon Yes

Like · Reply · 2 · Wednesday, June 26 at 12:31pm (23 hours ago)via mobileReply
James Leonardo Yes because police in all departments could share the job and taxpayers only have to pay one department and they could share the cost

Like · Reply · 4 · Wednesday, June 26 at 12:38pm (23 hours ago)via mobileReply
Ed Tang YES, Amalgamate!

Like · Reply · 3 · Wednesday, June 26 at 12:40pm (23 hours ago)Reply
Patrick R R Newman Yes! It's high time we joined the 21st century! The larger our population center, the larger the tax base = more of our tax dollars back from Ottawa for infrastructure you Luddite ninnies who fear change for the better! The only reason we haven't is because our civic leaders want to maintain their little fiefdoms.

Like · Reply · 6 · Wednesday, June 26 at 12:40pm (23 hours ago)via mobileReply
Christian Stocker Yes. Currently its a reason we don't get so many federal infrastructure dollars - too many voices wanting different things. Look at Kelowna (only 2 municipalities - and guess what they have a rapid bus service - we don't!)!

Like · Reply · 4 · Wednesday, June 26 at 12:46pm (23 hours ago)Reply

Susan Jones and for some backup Christian have a look at this doc.http://amalgamationyes.ca/images/PDF/why.pdf

Like · 6:05am (6 hours ago)Reply

Councillor David Screech I sincerely hope that all the issues surrounding amalgamation will be laid out, both the pros and the cons. There is a misconception that property taxes will go down and this is clearly not the case. We have heard a lot in the media of the supposed "pros", can we also hear the cons and some coverage of the many failed amalgamations across the country.. We live in a wonderful place, lets be careful what we do because we think it will somehow be "better".

Like · Reply · 3 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:09pm (23 hours ago)Reply

Richard Gordon Personally I don't believe there will be any financial saving but there will be efficiencies created within the system and simple inter-municipal squabbling that takes place may be reduced. I also sincerely hope term limits are discussed for the simple fact that the majority of folks get re-elected based on name recognition and its time for fresh ideas

Like · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 2:19pm (22 hours ago)Reply
Susan Jones Multiplicity of 5 Core Capital Regional District (CRD) Municipalities and
Stand-alone Municipalities
Property Tax Increase Comparisons 2007 - 11 - this document shows comparisons - stand alone municipalities have higher taxeshttp://amalgamationyes.ca/

Amalgamation Yes - Greater Victoria BC
amalgamationyes.ca
Amalgamation Yes,to achieve more effective and accountable governance within the capital region through municipal amalgamation.

Like · 6:04am (6 hours ago)Reply

Brent Carney Yes. Simply to reduce the waste and redundancy of multiple municipalities for an area that has over the years grown into one.

Like · Reply · 4 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:10pm (23 hours ago)Reply
Alisia Marie Yes, yes, yes! 1000 times, yes!

Unlike · Reply · 4 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:10pm (23 hours ago)Reply
Kevin Baker Hell YES. The louder the voice the bigger the impact. The louder the voice the more attention it gets. The louder the voice, and maybe we would all get our politicians to take notice and do what we elected them for.

Like · Reply · 3 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:14pm (23 hours ago) viamobileReply
Tom Shaffer Yes! The present fragmented system is expensive, ineffective, and archaic. Let's forget about small-town political ambitions and get with the 21st century reality.

Like · Reply · 2 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:18pm (23 hours ago)Reply
Stephen Smith Yes, but we should still have 3 municipalities. 'The Saanich Peninsula', 'The Westshore' and 'The Core'. Although the CRD population is not too high, it is a large area with a lot of diversity and different issues.

Like · Reply · 3 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:19pm (23 hours ago) viamobileReply

Debra Lynn Magnuson I totally agree with you on the three municipalities. There are VERY different issues and needs in these three areas, and I think having them under one blanket would be chaotic!

Like · 2 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:30pm (22 hours ago)Reply
Christine Thompson I think 3 municipatlites is the way to go, too

Like · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 2:46pm (21 hours ago)Reply
View more replies

Susan Jones We are asking for a Non-binding vote 2014 election - strong support for change should trigger funds for in-depth study AND community consultation / recommendations on what amalgamation could look like, would be best suited for our small population and geographic area and expected outcomes. Contact your Mayor, Council members, MLA - and media BE LOUD.

Unlike · Reply · 5 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:28pm (22 hours ago)via mobileReply
Aaron Hall Wow! Great response!

Unlike · Reply · 3 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:28pm (22 hours ago)via mobileReply
Jamie Wallace Yes! Too many little kingdoms run by over ambitious people. Would save money and be much more effective. In the time of fiscal restraint, this is a no brainer!

Unlike · Reply · 2 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:28pm (22 hours ago)Reply
Susan Jones Folks our elected officials are only working with what they currently have to work with - 13 municipalities. They have dedicated themselves to public service, hard working and few accolades. Many do what they do full of good good intentions. Lets give them the opportunity to hear reasonable arguments for reducing the number of municipalities and in turn lets hear them.

Like · Reply · 4 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:33pm (22 hours ago) viamobileReply
Bunny Bente Yes, it would be nice if all the police stations would talk to each other. And work together.

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:41pm (22 hours ago) viamobileReply

Gord Savory The current system that the police have, utilizing CREST allows them all to talk to one another as it ties all the Capital regions emergency services together, including transit. Its the municipal works, bylaws, and other things that are different between each municipality that under amalgamation would universalize all the sewers, garbage etc. and there'd be no confusion as to what you can do in saanich as to what you cant do in oak bay...kind of thing

Like · Wednesday, June 26 at 6:10pm (18 hours ago)Reply

John Vickers A Big YES!

Unlike · Reply · 3 · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:47pm (22 hours ago)Reply
Photos by Camerabug Absolutely. Presently, all 13 fiefdoms have their own agendas and consequently nothing gets done. It would also render the CRD redundant and that alone would result in huge economies.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 1:56pm (22 hours ago)Reply
Dianne Marks Absolutely. It is ridiculous to have so many "chiefs" and yes operating their fiefdoms. Get on with it. I don't really support CRD as it stands now.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 2:01pm (22 hours ago)Reply
Gord Savory Yes. It should have been done years ago. 13 municipalities? Really? Each with its own by-laws etc? what you can do in Saanich you cant do in Victoria, etc etc. Just put it under one blanket, simplify everything. We have the resources just put it all together and kill the confusion.

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 2:03pm (22 hours ago)Reply
Michael Sharpe Because I live in Victoria, yes. If I lived in Oak Bay, no.

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 2:13pm (22 hours ago)Reply
David Caughran Yes.

We are asking for a Non-binding vote 2014 election - strong support for change should trigger funds for in-depth study AND community consultation / recommendations on what amalgamation could look like, would be best suited for our small population and geographic area and expected outcomes. Contact your Mayor, Council members, MLA - and media BE LOUD.

Like · Reply · 3 · Wednesday, June 26 at 2:14pm (22 hours ago)Reply
Wally Gregora If we want to have progress, we should do what other cities have done. Become one. With progress, comes sacrifice. But ego needs to stay out of the equation. It is and has been the only reason why we haven't amalgamated yet. It's time the municipalities think outside their own box and look at the bigger picture for the best interest of the whole city!

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 2:16pm (22 hours ago)Reply
Shari Lukens I took the first step last evening by presenting a report to Committee of the Whole asking my Colwood City Council colleagues for their support on having a question put on the 2014 ballot. It will come before council on July 8th. My intention with the request is to: create a task force to engage with our public, identify the question and get it on the 2014 ballot. The objective of the question is to identify whether or not our community wants the city to participate in exploring the opportunities that regionalization of services and/or amalgamation and what the cost and benefits (or not) would be. We need to ensure expectations are managed and I don't believe we should be asking the question of 'amalgamation or regionalization of services' without the information. First steps first - engage the public and see if there is support in their municipality being able to go the next step and engage the provincial government to fund the studies required to provide the information - to ALL. Great opportunity here for the BC Liberal government to take a leadership role IF WE present them the opportunity!

Unlike · Reply · 3 · Wednesday, June 26 at 2:43pm (21 hours ago)Reply
Tannis Sampson Atchison Nope.... We should split it up more... We need more mayors!! (kidding!)

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 2:46pm (21 hours ago)Reply
Gayle Lester of course!

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 3:00pm (21 hours ago)Reply
Andrew Zado Each municipality has its own personality and people choose where they live based on this. I don't want to inherit the problems of poor planning and old infrastructure driving my taxes up to support another city. Although we have 13 sets of everything and the CRD, there is no guarantee it will be cheaper for the taxpayer; it just isn't quite that simple. With a wide variety of service levels I am not sure how you can please each community. so many questions to be answered before I can vote.

Like · Reply · 5 · Wednesday, June 26 at 3:20pm (21 hours ago)Reply

Susan Jones Andrew, we hear you loud and clear. Did you know that amalgamation agreements can be put into place whereby certain aspects are left off the table? or put on the table? even separate levies can be incorporated. This is an open book waiting to be written by the citizens of our region - but only if we are given the opportunity to vote on a non-binding question on the 2014 ballot.

Like · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 4:24pm (20 hours ago)Reply
Dan Iel Susan, we already have a CRD to manage services across the region, and if certain services are deemed less expensive when shared by municipalities that can be done too. How could forcing all services, city staff and counsellors to be shared possibly be better?

Like · 11:02am (about an hour ago)Reply

Peter Pfann I would love to see the issue and dialogue towards better and more democratic governing and operations of our region
It is early days and This isn't about losing what we have or even saving money, it is about making our community function better, more efficient and get the resources to the people that need them in a way that works, while it offers accountable governing, by a duly elected entity (unlike the CRD).
We are or should be sharing so many essential services in some ways, but currently in a very obscure and inefficient way, removing layers of politics, bureaucracies, and administration will without question allow for improvements everywhere.

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 3:31pm (20 hours ago)Reply
Councillor David Screech Well Peter, ask the residents of Toronto who were told that years ago and now would give anything to go back in time, or Halifax or Montreal which amalgamated and has been steadily "de-amalgamating" every since! Anger with the CRD over sewage treatment is one thing but we should not be confusing that with the long term well being of the region. How anyone can really believe that larger bureaucracies are more efficient is puzzling, to say the least!

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 3:38pm (20 hours ago)Reply

Peter Pfann David, let's at least have a proper dialogue and be open minded about it, its the democratic thing to do........
This region is very small and with a very low population base as well as a huge amount of shared issues, which have in the past and continue to cause many challenges locally thru out the region....

My Issue with the CRD is not about the Sewage treatment alone (although it illustrates the shortcomings of its un-democratic existence.

I agree with you that as a regional (amalgamated) service provider, the CRD does a lot of things very well..... (it is in fact one of the reasons I think some form of further amalgamation of services and governance would work so well in our region).
My main issue I have with the CRD is that they control so much and are not directly elected or accountable to the population it serves..... That is (in my opinion) totally unacceptable on so many levels in a supposedly free and democratic society....

The silly name calling and highly uncalled for power struggles between counselors and CRD board of Directors is just one more thing we could all do without, and distracts from the real issues at hand....

Like · 3 · Wednesday, June 26 at 3:58pm (20 hours ago)Reply
Richard Gordon David, I don't believe your voice carries any more weight than any other taxpayer in this region. I respect your position and your willingness to come on to an open forum to discuss it. I think its important that the citizens of this region are given a choice by being asked a non-weighted question. I'm also curious if there is a conflict of interest for local elected politicians to even voice their personal opinion on this.....

Like · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 4:38pm (19 hours ago)Reply
View more replies

Susan Jones Councillor Screech, those very large eastern Canada cities that amalgamated with other very large cities cannot be compared to our population or geography here on Vancouver Island (i.e municipalities with less than 20,000 people etc.). We are capable of creating our own amalgamation 'model' and use best practices found in other very successful amalgamations right here in BC.

Like · Reply · 2 · Wednesday, June 26 at 3:56pm (20 hours ago)Reply
Susan Jones To quote you here Councillor Screech "How anyone can really believe that larger bureaucracies are more efficient is puzzling, to say the least!" We agree 100%! 13 municipalities with 76 Councillors for a total population of 360,000 people on the tip of an island is far to large.

Like · Reply · 4 · Wednesday, June 26 at 3:58pm (20 hours ago)Reply
Aaron Hall Very true Susan! By all rational accounts the current situation is silly.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 4:25pm (19 hours ago) viamobileReply
Al Furlong Yaaa Susan. Finally a person that's logical

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 4:34pm (19 hours ago) viamobileReply

Greg Hill How so?

Like · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:55pm (18 hours ago)Reply

Kevin Warren Been there done that in Halifax, all it means is that all the services get focused in one area with everyone paying for it. So it's great for some but the majority of people get less service for the same cost .

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 4:51pm (19 hours ago) viamobileReply

Susan Jones How could we resolve that in our amalgamation Kevin? we must be able to provide an acceptable level of service? can we assume that everyone feels the levels now are acceptable?

Like · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:27pm (18 hours ago)Reply
Kevin Warren I work in Victoria but reside up Island so I cannot comment on quality of service as it stands. The benefit is that communicating between police services or other emergencies would be seamless if amalgamation would take place. My concern would be for revitalization or maintence of communities, not sure if people would appreciate someone from Oak Bay deciding if a road in View Royal should get paved or not. In Halifax it was quite evident that in the winter the priortization of who got snow plowed first was depending on which community had more influence. That was just one example.

Like · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:54pm (18 hours ago) via mobileReply

Richard Critchlow I most certainly would, only if it was done properly it's time to end the dysfunctional system we have.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:05pm (19 hours ago)Reply
Lori King we certainly need that conversation, the way things work right now is appalling, chaotic, and undemocratic. We are a region, we need to act more like one while maintaining the identity of our communities, i'm certainly for an amalgamation of services and maybe a ward system.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:11pm (19 hours ago)Reply
Colleen Hack yes, I would vote for amalgamation. our tax dollars would stretch further if there was only one municipality, rather than the current 13.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:13pm (19 hours ago)Reply

Greg Hill conjecture or fact?

Like · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:57pm (18 hours ago)Reply
Colleen Hack thank you for asking, Greg. it is my personal belief that if the same amount of tax dollars only had to pay for one bureaucracy, rather than 13, there would be more money to spend on the new bridge, secondary sewage treatment, education, etc.

Like · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 6:17pm (18 hours ago)Reply
View more replies

Richard Critchlow How many of you when you have mail addressed to you it's addressed to you in Victoria, not Esquimalt, Sannich Oak Bay etc.

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:15pm (19 hours ago)Reply

Councillor David Screech Richard, you don't have to put Victoria, you can put whatever jurisdiction you live in!!

Like · 9:52am (2 hours ago)Reply

Kevin Ryan Absolutely not!!!! Leave Saainich alone! I could see Victoria absorbing Esquimalt and part of Oak Bay, while Saanich absorbs northern Oak Bay and parts of View Royal. Langford, Colwood & the Highlands together,,, Central Saanich, North Saanich & Sidney together,,,,and Metchosin,,,,well, I don't know. One thing we could easily do away with that would save the taxpayer a lot of money and give more options to voters, with more accountability is doing away with the top heavy and dictorial C.R.D...

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:18pm (19 hours ago)Reply
Heidi G Stevens no !

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:24pm (19 hours ago) viamobileReply
Karen Skogstad Yes - way too many chiefs and costs too much

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:34pm (18 hours ago)Reply

Greg Hill Easy to say but the reality is in amalgamated municipalities we've seen growth in government, specifically, unelected city managers and adminstrative staff who, at the end of the day aren't accountable to constituents. You end up with more committees and more staff and less representative government. Plus, add in the side effects of losing local personality, consolidation of power to fewer people, and what will like come is a monsterous facility to house an amalgamated City Hall which will cost 10's of millions.

Like · 2 · Wednesday, June 26 at 6:01pm (18 hours ago)Reply

John Vickers CHEK says this evening poll result was 75% against amalgamation - early this afternoon it showed over 70% for amalgamation which reflected the CFAX poll which showed over 70% for amalgamation. You have to wonder if the numbers were inadvertently reversed.

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 5:53pm (18 hours ago)Reply
Josh Steffler nah the majority of people are quite happy without some super control grid like the CRD running everything...

I am happy in Esquimalt and dont want to be ruled by Victoria council thanks. Amalgamation would make the sewage issue even worse because there would be POSSIBLY one local person fighting for the neighborhood instead of bigger numbers protecting their own neighborhoods.

Amalgamation is bad for humans, good for bureaucracies and will only happen by force which will make it null and void.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 6:01pm (18 hours ago)Reply
Mike Lilly I vote de-amalgamation and BC succession from Canada.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 6:03pm (18 hours ago)Reply
Sharon Ferguson No, roblembecause we would just inherit other areas p

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 6:08pm (18 hours ago)Reply
Kevin Warren Interesting read
http://thechronicleherald.ca/metro/106401-mayoral-candidate-hall-says-he-d-revisit-amalgamation

Mayoral candidate Hall says he’d revisit amalgamation
thechronicleherald.ca
UPDATED 5:12 a.m. Wednesday Vince Hall officially announced his candidacy Tuesday for mayor of Halifax.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 6:08pm (18 hours ago) viamobileReply
Sharon Ferguson Oops!! No, because we would just inherit other areas problems and debts. Although I don't always area with everything the do (i.e. Too

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 6:10pm (18 hours ago)Reply
Sharon Ferguson Too much development and not the roads to support the increase in traffic, overall I believe Langford is the best run council in Greater Victoria.

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 6:12pm (18 hours ago)Reply
Brenda Dunn Yes although not necessarily down to one.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 6:13pm (18 hours ago) viamobileReply
Trond Johansen I would vote yes in a heart beat look at Calgary one city one mayor one police force etc etc my property taxes were half of what they are here also they have the parks board not the political CRD like we have they have a great system we need to get all that settled before a sewer system

Like · Reply · 2 · Wednesday, June 26 at 6:40pm (17 hours ago) viamobileReply
Pat Battles No. They'd find a way of creating costly bureaucracies with centralized power......I think it would all become more political.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 7:35pm (16 hours ago)Reply
Dan Iel Amalgamation has been studied and it doesn't work in the way you might expect. Instead of speculating about how an amalgamated region might be more cost effective, it's better to rely on the results of actual study. In fact, smaller, more flexible government provides service at less cost. For more details, read the study:http://www.cdhowe.org/pdf/bish.pdf

Like · Reply · 1 · Wednesday, June 26 at 8:02pm (16 hours ago)Reply
Todd Simonson Yes...and so should the Cowichan Valley....way too much duplication of everything. The "city" of Duncan who now has less the 5000 people (therefore a "town" and surrounded by North Cowichan) gets away with the taxpayers of North Cowichan and the Province footing the bill for policing costs yet they spend money like they are a major city. They also have an over equipped firehall 1 block from another and a civic payroll unheard of for a 3 square mile area. Then there is the CVRD who has their top notch home office palace built in the heart of Duncan and paying Duncan taxes when they have a massive amount of other spots on their own lands. Oh ya...then there is the Cowichan Community Center (the big stick) and pool that is spliced up between all 3 areas but sits on NC land but most of the staff are paid by CVRD taxes!!! It's a joke anyway you look at it.

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 9:30pm (14 hours ago) · EditedReply
Amberlynn Linda Mather Absolutely YES!!!! We could be much more organized. We could get federal funding for light rail. We all could have compost pick up on garbage day! And sooooo much more! Time for change people!

Like · Reply · Wednesday, June 26 at 9:35pm (14 hours ago) viamobileReply
Eve Millington YES! BUT I would want to see three core municipalities instead of just one. A new Greater Victoria should include the Highlands, View Royal, Colwood, Langford, Victoria and Saanich. This is where the majority of the population live and where most growt...See More

Like · Reply · 10:44am (about an hour ago)Reply

Victoria Vision

Thursday, June 27, 2013

A Conversation on Amalgamation on the CHEK 6 Facebook Page

CHEK News: Official Page

No comments: