Amalgamation vote a waste of money
Times Colonist,
June 19, 2014
Re: “Amalgamation a local issue,” editorial, June 17.
I am surprised and disappointed with this editorial for three reasons.
First, it simply repeats the unfounded myths of the benefits of amalgamation. These myths are contrary to all of the facts that amalgamation results in a more inefficient and more expensive local government. It increases the amount of taxes paid by local taxpayers, creates a bigger municipal bureaucracy and larger elected council than existed before amalgamation and makes local government service delivery slower and less knowledgeable about local neighbourhoods.
Second, a referendum on amalgamation is just a huge waste of taxpayers’ money. Why should local governments pay for a referendum that seeks an answer to a question that all the facts show is foolish? Would we hold a referendum to increase the speed limits in school zones to 60 km/h or lower the drinking age to 15?
Third, because in July 4, 2013, the comment by Gaetan Royer, former city manager of Port Moody, appeared on these pages and stated quite clearly the argument that “bigger is better is pure ideology.” His research showed amalgamations led to “unavoidable disruptions in services,” “big bureaucracy,” “ill-informed call centre attendants” and increased complaints about delivery of services to residents.
Amalgamation referendum? No thanks. Just save our money and focus on local neighbourhood and community concerns today, rather than pursuing the ideology dreams of a vocal minority about the future that they alone seek.
Guy McDannold
Shirley
Times Colonist,
June 19, 2014
Re: “Amalgamation a local issue,” editorial, June 17.
I am surprised and disappointed with this editorial for three reasons.
First, it simply repeats the unfounded myths of the benefits of amalgamation. These myths are contrary to all of the facts that amalgamation results in a more inefficient and more expensive local government. It increases the amount of taxes paid by local taxpayers, creates a bigger municipal bureaucracy and larger elected council than existed before amalgamation and makes local government service delivery slower and less knowledgeable about local neighbourhoods.
Second, a referendum on amalgamation is just a huge waste of taxpayers’ money. Why should local governments pay for a referendum that seeks an answer to a question that all the facts show is foolish? Would we hold a referendum to increase the speed limits in school zones to 60 km/h or lower the drinking age to 15?
Third, because in July 4, 2013, the comment by Gaetan Royer, former city manager of Port Moody, appeared on these pages and stated quite clearly the argument that “bigger is better is pure ideology.” His research showed amalgamations led to “unavoidable disruptions in services,” “big bureaucracy,” “ill-informed call centre attendants” and increased complaints about delivery of services to residents.
Amalgamation referendum? No thanks. Just save our money and focus on local neighbourhood and community concerns today, rather than pursuing the ideology dreams of a vocal minority about the future that they alone seek.
Guy McDannold
Shirley
