[All] Halloran pushing for a vote on Merger

Tue Feb 9 21:47:20 EST 2010

Is Waterloo prepared to move to Kitchener City Hall ??   or   are the taxpayers expected to still foot the bill for *two* city hall locations...which in effect would be certainly *not* economical for the $$$$.  It would appear that many of the previous  amalgamations   and/or 'mergers' per se have not saved any money.   Indeed I have an article from the Toronto Star  from 2008 bewailing the terrible debt load that Toronto is carrying either because of  or in spite of amalgamation.   

There seems to be other stories of great difficulties and unhappiness with Toronto ,   Hamilton..Thunder Bay  and a lot of other forced unions (or unforced ones) .  The thing that really strikes me is that there is no financial gain  according to what limited info I have....and yes it is limited because I too have a life to lead outside of my volunteerism . 

Is this 'just a discussion? "  or   once the door is opened  will there be a "foot inplace" " to prevent closing it " in order to force the will of the current  proponents forward??  If I sound skeptical...trust it to my age and the old expression   "Experience teaches you to recognise the same mistake when you make it again."  The "trust factor" can be    good   or   blind. 

I go back to the "union" of the Kitchener   and the Waterloo   Chambers  of Commerce.     Both managers lost their jobs and 
a new person entirely was brought in  and this I have been told is the best way to go so there are no "favourites" to be played.
Not my idea but the advice of the so called "experts".

Kitchener has 250,000 population and we are slated to 'get'  100,000 more immigrants due to us being the larger size .  
Waterloo (I think) has 120.000 population  and they seem to be targeted for 30---40---50,000????additional immigrants.
 this means we'll have about 500,000 in a 'merged?'  Kitchener Waterloo.  That's a half a million!!! 
I guess a few of us might get lost in the shuffle  from cozy and close to too big for cozy and close.....but hey , they say that's progress. 
There has to be one heck of a 'Cracker Jack" team on duty with the pros and cons equally represented so that there can be 
"Devil's Advocates" at all times to prevent the super duper sales team from running amok with all the wonderful positives, or all the terrible negatives. And there has to be a watchguard  to ensure that some vital problems and/or issues now and soon to be on the table are not neglected and/or lost in the stress of this decision. 

I'm still sitting on the fence but acting as a "Devil's Advocate"   at this point in time. 
Certainly the question is more fairly and /or  correctly worded this time without the force of a 'probable' anticipated outcome.

From: Louisette Lanteigne 
  To: all at gren.ca 
  Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 10:27 PM
  Subject: [All] Halloran pushing for a vote on Merger

        Good Evening:

        At City Council tonight Mayor Halloran tabled the following "Notice of Motion" for consideration by Waterloo City Council on February 22, 2010:

        1. That the City of Waterloo request the Ontario Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing include a question on the October 2010 municipal election ballot for the City of Waterloo with the following suggested wording:

        "Do you support the members of Kitchener and Waterloo Councils engaging in discussions about the advantages and disadvantages of merging the Cities of Kitchener and Waterloo. Yes or No."

        2. That this Council recommend the following process to the 2010-2014 Council:

        a) In the event of a NO vote, Waterloo City Council will not enter into discussion on merging the cities of Kitchener and Waterloo.

        b) In the event of a YES vote, Waterloo City Council will direct staff to use the public involvement guidelines when complete to develop an appropriate strategy for how the City of Waterloo will report on the discussions to citizens and how citizens will be able to provide ongoing comment on the discussions.

        c) In the event of a YES vote, the City of Waterloo will provide opportunities to citizens and other municipal stakeholders, through public meetings, mailed and online submissions, and other forums, to identify areas of concern requiring discussion.

        d) In the event of a YES vote, topics of discussion will need to include but not be limited to: short and long term financial impacts, negotiations of shared utilities, municipal debt, service delivery, democratic representation, arts and cultural impact, economic development, and relationships with other levels of government and neighbouring municipalities.

        e) If the decision is made by Waterloo City Council to move forward with a formal proposal on merging Kitchener and Waterloo; the final merger proposal will be brought  back to the citizens of Waterloo through a referendum.

        I have blind carbon copied this email to all the citizens who have taken the time over the past years to email me comments with regard to this issue and other issues within the City and the Ward.  I have done this because I value your feedback.  In particular I would appreciate knowing if you do or do not support the above motion.  I would also welcome any comments that you may have on this new motion or on the broader issue.

        With regard to the above I offer the following observations for your consideration:

        1. Many individuals indicated their concern over the previously requested wording of the question citing that the former words "merits of amalgamation" predetermined an outcome and led voters to believe that there were only merits.  The above referenced wording clarifies that both advantages and disadvantages surrounding amalgamation would need to be equally considered.

        2.  The question placed to Council in the past did not outline a "process" or clarify what a majority Yes or majority No vote would result in.  Many people who emailed and telephoned me felt that No was only a No for this election and that the question would continue to be asked.  As well, many individuals felt that a Yes vote was a clear mandate to amalgamate, not just to have a discussion.  Does the above motion provide clarity for you around these issues?

        3. Many citizens thought that asking a question to have a discussion was unnecessary and that citizens should be asked yes or no to what was seen as the real question, do you want to amalgamate Yes or No.  Item e) of the above motion also includes a piece associated with that fundamental question once information has been prepared for the citizens to review.

        It is my goal to summarize all of the feedback I receive (without names of course) and prepare a summary report which I will be pleased to circulate back under blind carbon copy to all who respond.  Please note that this will be returning to Council on Monday February 22, therefore I would value your response by the 21st. 

        Thank you and Best Regards,

        Diane Freeman, FEC, P.Eng. 
        Councillor - Ward 4 
        Cell: 519-569-9955

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

  _______________________________________________
  All mailing list
  All at gren.ca
  http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/all_gren.ca
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20100209/f60b06e9/attachment.html>