Amalgamation - nothing happening yet

It has been more than 50 days since the new councils have been sworn and close to 70 since election night and nothing has happened with amalgamation.   We had the public in eight municipalities vote on the issue and in seven cases voted in favour.    It seems there is a fairly clear desire to have something happen but nothing has started.

I do not know why the various local governments have not yet started to do anything on it.   I think the public will accept some delay in anything happening, but I do not think it can be delayed for too long.   At some point the public is going to feel disrespected if nothing is happening.  

The mood of the public is clearly open to the idea of amalgamation.  Going against this mood could lead to a backlash at the polling both in 2018.   Councils need to be seen to be doing something on amalgamation.

I could understand if there were bigger issues looming over the councils in the region, but in the last six weeks I have not seen any major municipal issues come forward.    The Saanich soap opera is not about governance or municipal issues.

If action is not taken soon by the councils I suspect there will be angry public ready to vote for new people.   A significant reason people voted against Frank Leonard was how he handled the amalgamation issue.  He at first dismissed it even though there is very high support for the issue in Saanich and then he offered a question to be put on the ballot that avoided asking anything clear about amalgamation.   I know many people who voted against Frank Leonard purely because of the amalgamation issue.

How long can they leave it?   I think another month or two at most before people start complaining.

What I would like to see is some announcements, one from the three Peninsula mayors and another from the mayors of Esquimalt, Saanich and Victoria.    Something public that says "Yes we are going to work on amalgamation".

What now for amalgamation?

To be clear to everyone, the provincial government is not going to do anything unless it is asked to do so by the local governments.  

I think we are most likely to see the most action on amalgamation on the Peninsula and I suspect that Central Saanich Mayor Ryan Windsor will become the leader on the issue.   The three peninsula communities have worked together closer than any others in this region.   They actually meet together as councils several times a year.   Politically the process is likely to move forward not only because of the leadership from Central Saanich but also because the civil war in North Saanich is over, for the moment, and the new mayor in Sidney is pragmatic.

I would be surprised if they did not start their process within the next few months.

In the core things are much more mixed.  Oak Bay has shot the idea down and has a mayor who is dead set against looking into the issue at all.  They are clearly not going to be anyone's partner.

Saanich voted for a process that will take a number of years to get the point where they can talk with neighbours about amalgamation.  The new mayor, Richard Atwell, is supportive of amalgamation but he has to work within the context of his council.   I do not see how he can end-run the process envisaged by the out going mayor to engage the community on the way forward without breaking his promise of being more open to the public

One of the most obvious "marriages" in this region is Saanich and Victoria, but given the track record of the city of Victoria over the last decade or more it is hard to see how this "marriage" could easily be made palatable to the people of Saanich.  There are ways to deal with all the issues, but it is complex

Both Esquimalt and Victoria voted in favour but I suspect that Esquimalt is not likely to be keen on going down the amalgamation path with Victoria;   Victoria has 82,595 residents versus Esquimalt's 16,389, Victoria has five times the number of people.  Also, the Esquimalt experience with the police is hardly one that inspires confidence.   If anything is going to happen here it will only come if the new council in Victoria shows themselves to be trustworthy partners for Esquimalt.

Esquimalt can consider two directions other than hooking up with Victoria - either with Saanich or with View Royal.  

View Royal did not have a vote on studying amalgamation but I do not think the council would be opposed to sitting down with Esquimalt and talking.   There are reasons why this match might make sense, though serious studying is needed.

• Large parts of View Royal are very closely connected to western parts of Esquimalt.   
• The two municipalities are small but a combined one could allow for some efficiency in operations and also allow for a deeper pool of knowledge and skills at City Hall.  
• It would improve local government planning for the Gorge and Esquimalt Habour.  
• Esquimalt already has a professional fire department and realistically View Royal should probably have one.  Amalgamating could be beneficial for that 
• Esquimalt would be able to get out of the Victoria Police contract

The other direction for Esquimalt is partnership with Saanich.   Saanich has been seen as financially well managed but once again it is not a partnership of equals.  Also, Saanich is committed to a process that will delay any discussion of amalgamation.

Meanwhile on the Westshore only Langford voted on the issue and it was a very narrow win for actually amalgamating Langford into a larger municipality but there are no neighbouring partners that had a vote as well.   They are partner-less so I think it will die there on the Westshore for now.

Results of the Amalgamation Referendums

Results
Municipality    Yes %  No %   Yes    No 
Saanich         88.5%  11.5% 21,437 2,780
Victoria        80.0%  20.0% 18,351 4.601
Central Saanich 70.7%  29.3%  3,588 1,489
Sidney          67.6%  32.4%  2,566 1,232
Esquimalt       67.5%  32.5%  2,905 1,404
North Saanich   62.5%  37.5%  2,881 1,727
Langford        51.6%  48.3%  2,222 2,209
Oak Bay         37.7%  61,2%  2,184 3,594
                             56,134 19,025


The Questions - they were rather varied across the region
Central Saanich
Should the District of Central Saanich petition the Province to fund a cost/benefit analysis of an amalgamation of Central Saanich, North Saanich and Sidney?
Esquimalt
Are you in favour of exploring the reduction of the number of municipalities within Greater Victoria through amalgamation with?
Langford
Are you in favour if the City of Langford being amalgamated into a larger regional muncipality?
North Saanich
Non-Binding Question: Are you in favour of a study, provincially funded, to investigate the feasibility, costs and implications of amalgamating the three municipalities on the Saanich Peninsula of Sidney, Central Saanich and North Saanich?
Oak Bay
Are you in favour of the District of Oak Bay being amalgamated into a larger regional municipality?
Saanich
Do you support Council initiating a community-based review of the governance structure and policies within Saanich and our partnerships within the Region?
Sidney
Non-Binding Question: Are you in favour of a provincially funded study to investigate the feasibility, costs and implications of amalgamating the three municipalities of the Saanich Peninsula?
Victoria
Are you in favour of reducing the number of municipalities in Greater Victoria through amalgamation?

Just Vote For Amalgamation

VictoriaVision Video - Who speaks for Victoria?

The coming Big Earthquake - a crucial reason we need amalgamation now.

Right now we have a host of local government emergency services in this region that are not coordinated.. I have no doubt that all the people involved are doing their best but they seem to be all be constrained by the boxes created in their minds by the existence of our arbitrary municipal boundaries.   We have a structure in place that is not the best we can do.

When the large earthquake happens people's lives will be at stake and the lack of a well thought out single plan for our region means we will see more people die than we need to.   There is an easy solution that will offer us better and more effective emergency services in the event of an earthquake - amalgamation.

I defy anyone to say that the following list is the best way to prepare for a major disaster in this region:

• Victoria Police
• Victoria Fire Department - Emergency Management
• Esquimalt Fire Department - Esquimalt Emergency Program
• Saanich Police
• Saanich Fire Department - Saanich Emergency Program - Saanich Search and Rescue
• Oak Bay Police
• Oak Bay Fire Department - Oak Bay Emergency Program
• Peninsula Emergency Measures Organization which includes the following:

1. Central Saanich Police
2. Central Saanich Fire Department
3. Peninsula RCMP Detachment
4. North Saanich Fire Department
5. Sidney Fire Department
6. Peninsula Disaster Response/Search and Rescue Team

• Westshore RCMP Detachment
• View Royal Fire Department - View Royal Emergency Program - they plan on operating their one Emergency Operations Centre
• Colwood Fire Department - Colwood Emergency Planning Committee - I do not see anything on their site linking to any other local government
• Langford Fire Department
• Metchosin Fire Department - Metchosin Emergency Program
• Highlands Fire Department - Highlands Emergency Program - The will have their own Emergency Operations Centre 
• Sooke RCMP Detachment
• Sooke Fire Department - Sooke Emergency Planning
• CRD operated 9-11
• CRD Hazmat response 
• Juan de Fuca Search and Rescue - Juan de Fuca Fire Departments - Juan de Fuca Emergency Program
• Local Government Emergency Program Advisory Commission
• Regional Emergency Coordinators Advisory Commission

In looking through all the sites I find very little sense that in the event of a major disaster there will be any sort of effective coordination of the responses.   I see numerous different emergency programs with wildly differing capabilities.    Other than PEMO on the peninsular, for each of these emergency programs I see more or less nothing that would indicate that neighbouring municipalities are considered in their plans.

Only one municipality has included emergency preparedness in their official community plan even though we know a building damaging earthquake in this region in the next 50 years is a one in three chance.

Not only are we not prepared for a region wide disaster, we have structure in place that will not be nearly as effective as it should be.  The status quo can not be as effective as properly coordinated and centrally operated emergency services.   To continue with what we have now puts the lives of people in this region at risk.

 Note the comments at 2:20 in this report

Vote Yes for Amalagamation

Vote for Yes from AmalgamationYes on Vimeo.

Cool Infographic about Amalgamation

Email from Amalgamation Yes

THE MUNICIPAL ELECTION IS NOVEMBER 15, 2014

We are writing to you as either a member of Amalgamation Yes, or as a signatory to a petition supporting a request that your municipality present a non-binding question on amalgamation. The purpose of this email is to update you on recent events in our drive to enable citizens to express their views on this important topic.

We are pleased to advise that there will be a referendum question on the ballot in at least five (5) municipalities, Victoria, Esquimalt, Central Saanich, Sidney and Langford.  We also anticipate more municipalities will join our initiative.  Because of time constraints imposed by the preparation and delivery of a ballot question, however, any municipality not announcing its intention to do so by early October will probably not be presenting a question.

If you are a resident of one of these municipalities currently not participating (Saanich, North Saanich, Oak Bay, Sooke, Metchosin, Colwood, View Royal and the Highlands) it would help if you contact your local council and encourage them to do so.

For your information there is a new political party not affiliated with Amalgamation Yes called the Pro-Amalgamation Party.  It may be of interest to you if you live in one of the eight municipalities listed above because if ultimately your community doesn't present a non-binding question, it will give you an opportunity to express your views on the amalgamation question in an indirect way.

 The new party plans to endorse one (1) candidate in each municipality that does not present its own ballot question. These candidates will have a common platform, "to pursue a study into amalgamation options". The total number of votes for Pro-Amalgamation Party candidates would reflect the number supporting the non-binding question.

We would additionally highlight that in order for the candidates to have the words  "Pro-Amalgamation Party" listed by their names on the ballot, the party must have 50 members in that municipality. Thus if you find yourself living in a municipality not presenting a question and support the aims of the Pro-Amalgamation Party, you can become a member by simply signing up on their website www.proamalgamation.ca. They also welcome volunteers.

In the meantime, Amalgamation Yes is continuing its own efforts in trying to persuade those councils that have so far refused to place a non-binding question on their ballot, to reconsider their decision.

 In the weeks leading up to the election we will be informing the public of the issues involved through regular updates of our website http://www.amalgamationyes.ca and media releases, and encouraging you to attend public meetings and ask candidates about their stance on amalgamation.
We may also need your assistance in delivering material or getting out the vote.

In order to be able to play this role, it is necessary that Amalgamation Yes be registered as a third party for the election, as required under the BC Elections Act.   Any expenditure by the organization will have to be reported to BC Elections.  

This will be an historic election and we all need to get out and vote on November 15, 2014.  Amalgamation Yes will be reminding supporters to vote on that day and if necessary assisting them in getting to the polling station.
In order for the Province of British Columbia to initiate an in depth study into municipal amalgamation models, conduct public hearings and present options, YOU MUST VOTE TO INDICATE YOUR SUPPORT (AND GET AS MANY TO JOIN YOU AS POSSIBLE!).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please keep those letters to editors and councils going!

From today's Times Colonist:

Saanich council silent on amalgamation question
Times Colonist
September 24, 2014
There is a syndicate of silence from Saanich council on offering a non-binding referendum to residents to study amalgamation. Not a single councillor has yet cracked this iron solidarity and created a motion to include this on the November ballot. They simply know nothing, see nothing, hear nothing.
Commit those council names to memory and remember that they want your vote, but not your opinion. History teaches many lessons to self-satisfied regimes.
Lesley Ewing
Greater Victoria

- See more at:
http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/letters/saanich-council-silent-on-amalgamation-question-1.1386259#sthash.q945gPrz.pnfr0nJ7.dpuf

Lets work together and get every voter in our region the opportunity to vote on a non-binding question.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Susan Jones
President
Capital Region Municipal Amalgamation Society
Email: amalgamateyes@gmail.com
www.amalgamationyes.ca
Twitter: @amalgamationyes

45.5% of the Greater Victoria population will have a chance to vote in an amalgamation referendum

Last night both Esquimalt and Sidney agreed to put an amalgamation referendum on the ballot bringing the total number of local governments holding a referendum up to five.

Here is the list of all the municipalities in the CRD ranked by 2011 census population - green ones are holding a referendum, red are not

• Saanich        109,752
• Victoria        80,017 
• Langford        29,228 
• Oak Bay         18,015
• Esquimalt       16,209  
• Colwood         16,093  
• Central Saanich 15,936  
• Sooke           11,435  
• Sidney          11,178  
• North Saanich   11,089  
• View Royal       9,381  
• Metchosin        4,803   
• Highlands        2,120

A total of 152,568 people live in the five municipalities that have agreed to hold a referendum on amalgamation, 45.5% of the population in the 13 municipalities of the CRD will get a chance to vote.    182,688 people live in in the municipalities where there is no referendum being offered, yet.  I think there is still a chance that Oak Bay and Colwood will hold amalgamation referendums.  If they do, 55.7% of the population will have a chance to vote on the issue. 

If Oak Bay and Colwood choose to hold referendums six of the seven most populous jurisdictions will be holding referendums,   Saanich sort of sticks out for not holding a referendum 

Public Meeting Tuesday Sept 9th 6 pm to 8 pm for Pro-Amalgamation

Pro-Amalgamation will have a public meeting of the party (drop in) on September 9, 2014 from 6 pm to 8 pm, at:

Uptown Shopping Centre, 3440 Saanich Road
The Community Meeting Room
Located on Level 1 Green next to Guest Services,
Near the Walmart store entrance
Tuesday, September 9, 2014 from 6 pm to 8 pm

We will have people with signs to direct you the meeting room

Everyone is welcome to join in to hear how they can help win the referendum and tell our politicians what we want. Now is the time to stand up for what the Capital Region of British Columbia needs.

Population matters

One more reason to consider amalgamation is because as 13 separate local governments our region carries a lot less weight provincially and nationally than it should.

Ranked by population

•    City          BC  Canada   
• Saanich          8th  44th
• Victoria        14th  67th
• Langford        28th
• Oak Bay         36th
• Esquimalt       40th
• Colwood         41st
• Central Saanich 42nd
• Sooke           48th
• Sidney          52nd
• North Saanich   53rd
• View Royal      59th
• Metchosin       78th
• Highlands      107th

We have 13 different local governments seeking support from the province and feds.   The smaller the staff a local government has the less capacity it has to access funds and have any impact on the senior governments.

Being split up like this means we do not have a single strong local government voice for our city.   If we were one local government we would be the third most populous one in BC and 16th nationwide.  We would have one mayor that could speak for the whole city not just some of the neighbourhoods.  Instead we are generally ignored because we lack a single strong voice, at best we end up being lumped in with Kelowna, Kamloops and Nanaimo

With the larger population of a single local government we would be much better able to use the resources of the local government to attract business and development.   

2014 Amalgamation Referendum

Amalgamation Yes has worked hard to get local governments to offer a vote on amalgamation.  It is because of their work that we now have three municipalities putting a non-binding referendum on the ballot about amalgamation.

• Victoria - 80,017 people
• Langford - 29,288 people
• Central Saanich - 15,936 people

This means 37.4% of the people in the region will get a vote in a referendum on amalgamation.

Oak Bay and Esquimalt seem to be considering putting the question on the ballot.  I think Colwood could be convinced to put it on the ballot now that several municipalities have said they will.

This still leaves Sidney, North Saanich, Saanich, Highlands, View Royal, Metchosin and Sooke that do not look like they will allow the public to vote on this issue.

In the municipalities where the public are not being offered a vote on amalgamation Pro-Amalgamation will be running a candidate for council to act as an ersatz referendum.   The candidate will be identified on the ballot as being with Pro-Amalgamation and a vote for them is a vote to move forward on amalgamation.

Surrey costs less to run with more people than all the local government in the CRD

This comes from a posting on Facebook

Susan Jones

During the year 2011, Surrey with a population of 468,251 collected $54,645,913 less in taxes for municipal purposes than the CRD 13 with a population of 335,256. (Surrey collected $259,526,000 while the CRD collected $314,171,913 – these were taxes for municipal purposes only – they do not include taxes collected for other governments, e.g. Schools, Hospital Levy, Regional District, etc).

Assuming an average family size in Greater Victoria of 3 people – there were 111,752 families in the CRD in 2011 – dividing $54,645,913 (excess amount paid by CRD residents) by 111,752 families, each family in the CRD paid $488.00 more than the same family in Surrey. Surrey has a large paid Fire Department and the contract with the RCMP for policing exceeds the cumulative cost of the 4 municipal police forces and the RCMP contracts in Greater Victoria.

There was also an interesting letter to the editor in the TC
http://www.timescolonist.com/opinion...vices-1.631226

Re: “Hefty bus-tax hike eyed for homeowners,” Sept. 14.

Mayor Frank Leonard of Saanich is concerned about the proposed double-digit tax increase proposed by B.C. Transit, and he suggests that efficiencies would result from a regionally operated transit system. He is right.

While the mayor is worrying about the level of municipal taxation, I suggest he expand his area of concern to include the cost of other regional municipal services.

What about the economies associated with a single police force rather than having seven police chiefs in the region? How about considering one fire and emergency-response system instead of 13? How much money would that save? What about the savings involved in having one city hall rather than 13? What about the saving to everyone if there were one set of zoning bylaws and one set of building standards in the region instead of 13?

While we are talking about it, how much money would we save the local taxpayers if we halted the evolution the Capital Regional District into a fourth level of government?

A good start, Mayor Leonard. Now it is time to seriously look at amalgamation of the municipalities in the capital region.

Earle Anthony

Oak Bay

Public Forum on Amalgamation hosted by the Downtown Residents Association - Oct 2nd

On Oct. 2nd, the Victoria Downtown Residents Association will host a public forum on the question of the amalgamation of Greater Victoria’s municipal governments and emergency services. 

The forum will take place 7:00pm, Wednesday, October 2nd, at the Victoria Event Centre, 1415 Broad St. 

This public forum will be the first in a series aimed at informing and engaging Victorians on important issues facing our city.

Three speakers will provide different perspectives on the question of amalgamation in the Capital Region:

• John Vickers, spokesperson, Amalgamation Yes
• Gaëtan Royer, urban planner and author of Time for Cities
• Jamie Graham, Chief Constable, Victoria Police Department

Presentations will be followed by audience comments and questions. 

Once the formal event wraps up, speakers, attendees, and journalists can mix and continue the discussion in the Victoria Event Centre’s lounge.

Bar service will be available throughout the evening to those who are 19+ with 2 pieces of ID.

The event is all ages, and is free and open to the public. 

Media contact:
Graham Briggs, DRA member and event organizer: 250.217.0940, grahambriggs250@shaw.ca

About the speakers:

John Vickers is a spokesperson for Amalgamation Yes and has been actively involved in discussions on regional amalgamation since 2008. John is the board chair for the James Bay Community Project and board vice chair for the Victoria AM Association. He is also the producer of the Victoria International Buskers and Chalk Art Festivals and is the 2012 CFAX Arts Leader of the year. 

Visit http://amalgamationyes.ca/

Gaëtan Royer was Port Moody’s City Manager for 11 years and then head planner at Metro Vancouver. In 2007, he published Time for Cities, a book advocating for a better deal for Canadian municipalities. In his first career as a military engineer, Gaëtan worked in Esquimalt and Royal Roads, served as Base Engineer in Cold Lake, and was awarded a Governor General's Medal for his humanitarian work in Sarajevo. He is now Principal Consultant with citystate.ca.
Visit http://www.timeforcities.ca/
Here is a link to a letter to the Times Colonist Editor from Mr. Royer on the topic: 
Comment: A bigger municipality isn’t better, just bigger

Jamie Graham is Chief Constable of the Victoria Police Department. He was previously the Chief Constable of the Vancouver Police Department from 2002 to 2007 and before that he served just under 35 years with the RCMP. Chief Graham is an active member of local, provincial, national and international associations of police chiefs. He is President of the B.C. Association of Municipal Police Chiefs and a Director-at-Large of the British Columbia Association of Chiefs of Police. 
Visit http://www.vicpd.ca/

Is the current local government structure the most effective and best one for us?

With the increased debate of amalgamation we keep hearing from people not in favour of the idea what might be wrong with amalgamation, what we do not hear about is why the status quo works well for people. I think any debate of amalgamation has to focus first and foremost on how good the status quo is and if it works for us and this leads the question:

Is having the current 13 municipalities the best and most effective way to govern ourselves in this region?

• Does having 13 different mayors improve the political voice the people have in this region?
• Do the current boundaries make sense and lead to good decisions?  Is the best possible division of the  local government boundaries?
• Are we better served by having competing parks and recreation departments?
• Should we have 13 different zoning bylaws?
• Is it more effective to have multiple emergency plans for one region?
• Is the lack of regional wide planning help the quality of life?
• Is the work load so large in the region that we need 13 municipal administrators?
• Is the mix of municipalities make for better governance?  Does having small population local governments and large population local governments mean the decision making is better?
• Is it best to have local government primarily be concerned about residential interests and not commercial, industrial, or transportation needs?
• Does having 13 local governments make the costs of government cheaper?

My primary reason I want to see amalgamation is because I can see that the status quo is not giving us good government.   We pay over the odds for a lower quality of day to day government when compared to Nanaimo, Kelowna, Saskatoon or Abbotsford.   We really fail when it comes to bigger picture issues such as planning and, preparation for emergencies.

Rising pay for Mayors and Councilors in the CRD

This is a letter to the editor in the Times Colonist from July 8 2013

Re: “Mosaic of region jobs pumps up payrolls,” June 30.

Ten years ago, the Times Colonist was kind enough to publish a letter in which I analyzed the salaries of elected officials of the 13 municipalities, and compared the financial effect on citizens with a city which had only one mayor and council.

There are still 13 municipalities, with 13 mayors and 78 councillors.

The total mayors’ salaries in 2003 were $300,549. They are now $473,263.39, for an increase of $172,714.39 or 57.46 per cent.

The councillors’ salaries in 2003 totalled $827,006. This has mushroomed to $1,371,524, for an increase of $544,518 or 65.8 per cent.

Looking at the four core municipalities (Victoria, Saanich, Oak Bay and Esquimalt), the 2003 figures for the mayors was $171, 730. The present figure is $254,917, for an increase of $83,187 or 48.44 per cent.

For the councillors, the 2003 figure was $455, 824, which has risen to $768,938, an increase of $313,114 or 68.69 per cent. I doubt if many taxpayers have received such increases.

In my letter of 2003, I made the comparison with Edmonton, which has more than twice the population of our 13 municipalities and is managed by one mayor and 12 councillors.

These figures are for elected officials only. Thirteen city managers, fire chiefs and city halls with all the inevitable staff add up to vast sums to be provided by the taxpayer. Amalgamation of some sort would appear to be overdue.

Kenneth Brind

Brentwood Bay

© Copyright 2013

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