amalgamation conversation notes

8/3/2019 Amalgamation Conversation Notes

1/21

Pages were labeled in no particular order. These comments were directly

transposed from the large sheets of paper to this report for simple

handling.

Page 1/Side 1:What Dont We Know? (In order to come together on where we are going

next)

-How do we proceed? Referendum? Province Order?

-What is best model? Perhaps not effectively governed.-What communities will be hurt by regional services (ie. policing)?

-What services would be best to amalgamate to start with?

-Costs:-to reduce staff

-to reduce infrastructure

-value of services receivingcan we get more value for our dollars?

-planning and transportationwe dont have a body that can take

charge.

-whole is greater than the sum of the parts, we need more

information about other governments.

-what would happen with CRD if Greater Victoria amalgamated?-Successes, Challenges of those municipalities that have amalgamated.

-Taxpayers bearing brunt?-When are we going to start going bankrupt?

-What are advantages of system we [currently] have?

-How do we simplify government without losing effectiveness?

What common approaches can we take?

-all neighbourhoods are equal

-we live in a common region

-it is challenging to live ones life in one municipality-charettes

-neighbourhood associations: is there accountability

-CRD?


2/21

Page 1/Side 2:What Can We Share?

-water

-sewage

-recycling

-fire

-policing

-emergency

-transportation

-planning

-downtown core issues and associated costs

-identity, as Victorians-affordable housing strategy

-homelessness

-agricultural planning and food security

Page 2/Side 1:What We Dont Know:-we know taxpayers are bearing the brunt of taxation-too much talk

-we dont know what the initial cost would be (contracts, administration,

disposal of assets).

-we dont know what the best model is (disagree that we are overtaxed

the question is that we are not effectively governed)

-regional government is not accountable.

-how do we simplify government and retain neighbourhood rights?

-we dont know, costs-successes-problems. Are wards a solution?

-we dont know the electoral system.-we dont know advantages of our current system: whats broken, what

values (eg. diversity) that current system provides.-what communities would benefit/would be hurt?

-is amalgamation of services the way to start (ie. fire services?)

-echo, whats around the table the sum should be greater than the

parts (gut feeling) but is it?


3/21

-dont know what would happen with regional government CRD.

-dont know when we are going to start going bankrupt.

-how do we proceed? What are the steps?-Money. Taxes. Preserve Democracy. Representation.

-what is value of services we are receiving?

-can we be more efficient?

Page 2/Side 2:What Could We Share?-we are already doing some sharing and it isnt working (water, sewage,

recycling, police services, fire departmentseg. Esquimalt/Victoria: Is this

[arrangement] working? It would depend on who you ask and do they all

share equally?-[another comment on this thought]: its the governance thats the

issue[x thinks] this is a diversionary question and were getting

bogged down in details.

-we could share funding and coordination of the arts.

-[we could share] transportation, fire, police

-[we could share] planning and transportation this is a must

-the idea of shared policing is a deal breaker; voters in communities with

great service will vote against.

-the common approach is: we are all equal, we could all pay.-we share an identity; we cannot leave our lives in just one municipality

need to reframe.

-we all benefit from services that we dont pay directly for.

-what is the common approach to planning? Strong neighbourhoods,

frameworks for neighbourhod groups. Wheres the accountability of

neighbourhood groups/

-regional planning with teeth.

There is an indication that these are all detailsthe larger thing we need

to share is governance.

The fear of loss of services/loss of control will scuttle moves towardamalgamation, therefore, we need to reframewe are all benefitting from

services we are not directly paying for.


4/21

Page 3/Only SideWhat Common Approaches Could We Take:-people want to be responsible for decisions and for decisions that impact

them (eg. direct democracy: keeping in touch with their local

government).

-be engaged in decisions that touch our lives.

-all kinds of place-based services, eg. police, planning [to be] accessible

to local residents.

-affordable housing

-ability to control your areas destiny

-establish neighbourhood assemblies: consultation and outreach in small

communities

-good communication.

Page 4/What Could We Share? (Only Side):-human resource

-CRD expansion

-sewage treatment

-homeless issue

-tea and crumpets

-social housing

-transit LRT-some by-laws that are common to neighbouring communities

-road maintenance

-policing

-fire protection

-emergency services dispatch

-recreation

-regional planning functions

Page 5/-where is the political will?-leadership?

-lack of effective regional plan

-amalgamation would enable us to get more federal dollars, (eg. housing

infrastructure, transportation, sewer, water).


5/21

What Could We Share?-costs

-policing, emergency, investment opportunities, resources, fire

departments, successes and failures, by-laws (commercial), skill sets,

municipal politics much more visible, hopes and fears, decision making,

transportation aspirations, communication systems, quality of life, larger

issues: harm reduction, affordable housing.

-what common approaches could we share? Planning: rebuilding of the

system is required. Take the best from all the jurisdictions.

Page 6/Side 1: What We Dont Know-status of each 13 municipalities (similarities and differences, budgets,services)

-definition of amalgamationwhat are we wanting to do, change, keep?

-knowledge/information of how other cities did structure itsuggestions

of Toronto, Winnipeg.

-why arent politicians embracing the idea of amalgamation?

-what mechanism would we use?

-how the public sees it?

Page 6/Side 2:What Could We Share?-saving $$

Page 6/What Common Approaches Can We Take?-tough question:

a) either mandate all 13

b) or piece by piece: police, fire, admin

or


6/21

c) give more decision/administration to CRD Board

Page 7-[how could municipalities] interact?

-[relationship between] shared services and bureaucracy?

Page 8/What We Dont Know1. the carrying capacity of the region (49% municipalities; 51% capital

region)

2. after the decision is done, does the land return to the government?

3. Amalgamation, does the will exist?4. Is there a more effective way of governance?

5. Three Groups: Core, Westshore, Peninsula (get rid of the layers of

authority)

What Could We Share?What common approaches can we take?

-police service to be unified throughout the districts?

Page 9/What Could We Share?What Common Approach Could We Take?-police services!

-amalgamation yes!

Page 10/#1:-change legislation? Force amalgamation?

-what are the goals of amalgamation? Can they be achieved viaamalgamation?

-identify problemswhat are the solutions?-problems recent? Result of peripheral municipalities?

-City of Victoria burdened with cost of regional infrastructure (Blue

Bridge, Arena)

-Transportation needs: public LRT


7/21

-What would amalgamation look like? (police? Fire protection? Ward

system?)#2:-what do other jurisdictions share (ie. GVRD?)

-concerted approach to planning and development

-regional property tax rate

-policing

Page 11/Question 2: What Can We Share?-what can we share?

-police servicesVictoria, Esquimalt, RCMP

-Victoria bearing brunt of extra costs

-Issue #1: Everyone in Victoria suffers from apathy

Page 12Questions:

-how do we measure the effectiveness of local government services?

Then, model various sizes and configurations.

-what is a reasonable level of local government representation? Ratio of

constituents to councilors.

Potential to Share:

-local government service

1. police/fire/

2. engineering: water, sewer, roads,3. parks and rec

4. planning

5. business licence

6. building

*two words illegible

Page 13Could we share common approaches?-water

-transit-health

-waste

-school district

-library


8/21

-sports and recreation

-police

-911 and emergency-policy

-roads

Page 14: What We Dont KnowWhy cant province legislate amalgamation?

-Premier can change legislation to allow it (forced amalgamation)

What do other people say when they are asked about amalgamation?

Dont know of any other [area] with 13 mayors and 16 police forces.

Dont know what is impact on 8 first nations communities.

Dont know if wed save $$.

Dont know about municipalities other than Victoria think about it.

Dont know where to start the process.

Dont know the procedure required for amalgamation.

Dont know what it would take to approve amalgamation, assuming it isnt

mandated by province.

Dont know how individual community character could be maintained [in]

amalgamation.

Dont know if it would be as easy to get [in touch with] our councilor rep.

Dont know if amalgamation has worked elsewhere.

Page 15: What Could We Share/What Common Approaches Could WeTake-share: policing, dispatch 911 emergency service, and Emergency

Management Services


9/21

-planning (land)

-homelessness, affordable housing files

Possible Models/Approaches:

-schools, health and social services, VIHA

-garbage, organics, recycle services

Page 16:Deep Needs:

-green

-safe

-fair-kids

What Dont We Know?

-each others priorities

-success in other places

-works for business/residents? Who benefits?

-representation #/1000 people

-costs across region

-0/D live-work-where do we get data?

-how to measure efficiencies, effectiveness, accountability?

-who can create amalgamation processes?

-what are the distortions, inefficiencies, unfairnesses?

-what are the existing shared service agreements?

-how far along does this take us?

What Could We Share?

-facilities

-expertise-common policing, fire

-land claims

-Murray [Langdon]

-building codes and application procedures


10/21

-traffic rules and transformation

-chickens by-law

-wildlife-common approaches to Provincial/Federal [relations]

Page 17:-will municipal politicians give up fiefdoms

-who benefits?

-what benefits?

-what will it cost (money, representation)

-what does it cost now (municipal staff and services?)

-how do we measure efficiency of local government.

Page 18:What Dont We Know?-who will pay for this change?

-how funds/municipally are used?

-where services overlap, or there is duplication?

-how much 13 municipalities responsibilities overlap?

-can borders be changed?

-what would this cost/or would we save in taxes?

-a new model of councils with representatives from each municipalities?

-Town Hall Feeds for all to take part in a new system.

What Could We Share?-police, fire, planning for the region, transportation, school boards merger

to one.

-integration for arts, music, theatre (modern facility large enough), sports

facilities, social programs, housing (low-income).

What Common Approaches Can We Take?-to all of the above there could be common approaches.

-homelessness even though it falls on Victoriaall municipalitiescontribute to the problem we all should help.

Musings:-one mayor


11/21

-planning; two bridges will soon be out of service at the same time:

Johnson St. Bridge and Craigflower Bridgewhat if we had a single

governing body? Would they do this?-work, sleep, play [does not occur] in the same place; no input in areas

other than where we sleep!

-330 000 people with too many mayors and councilors.

-one police chief

-merger

-plebecite

-provincial[ly] mandated change?

-one development plan, please!

-save parkland and bogs! Dont build on them!

Page 19 Side 1:What Dont We Know?How much and who is amalgamating, interacting?

How much is taking place?

Finances/Expenditures-is amalgamation a way of achieving more financial

stability?

Whats broken? What are we trying to fix? What doesnt work and focus

on that.

BrokenCRD representation on boards. Esquimalt is just a silent partner.

We can complain but no balance. Talking takes place after a decision is

made. No accountability. Net result: cost.

More amalgamationgarbage, but not police because too contentious.

Going too far can become a monster. Tell us where its easy. When is it

enough?

3 Universities should share their information. [Information?] Back up at

different universitiesproblem that UVIC had recently with no back up.

Call centres dont have same equipment, so cant communicate.


12/21


13/21

Personality of areas can be maintained with one city with wards,

neighbourhood associations and other models yet to be discovered.

Inherent red tape of dealing with 10+ municipalities with different by-

laws, organizational structure and processes make it enormously costly.

Page 21: What We Dont KnowWhat would new model look like.

Why the Mayors dont want to amalgamate.

Page 22:What problems are you trying to solve?

Why now? (Pushing for amalgamation)

Bigger isnt always better; often its just bigger.

When everyone acts in their own best interest, then everyone takes

responsibility for their own situation.

Page 23:We dont know the cost of amalgamation/versus existing costs x 13

What could we share/

-police

-hospital

-EMS [emergency management services]

-firehalls-one mayor/one set of councilors/CRD/Sewer/Water/Bureaucracy/Policy

Development/IT systems/Contract Management/Zoning By-laws

Page 24:What Dont We Know?


14/21

Whats the problem?

Inefficient?How to measure efficiency? What evidence [that current

system is inefficient]?

What to amalgamate?

What are the boundaries ofyourcommunity?

How to maintain distinctiveness of neighbourhoods?

What differences among municipalities in: taxes, services, social issues

etc, building codes, zoning regulations, by-laws, permits.

What do these differences [see above] cost us? What benefits?

What Could We Share?-Police, fire

-Homelessness, social services

-Garbage

-Road maintenance

-Business licenc[ing]

-Building codes

What Common Approaches Can We Take?Regional police force

Page 25:What Dont We Know?What sizes work for each service or facilities?

What non-financial costs (ie. time and knowledge) do we save or

increase?

What are the fears of people who are against amalgamation.


15/21

1. emotional/intellectual amalgamation

2. tough to encourage economic development with so many

levels/governments

3. opportunistic investors/developers will take advantage of divided

approach, pit municipalities against each other (ie. Langford, Big

Box)

Page 26:Share:

Police-emergency

Fire

Schools-education (public)

Infra[structure] roads, sewers, highways, garbage, waste managementGovernance

Recreation

Industrial Lands

Common Approaches?

(nothing written here)

Page 27:What Dont We Know?-Who is going to pay for it?

-What funds are there? How [are they] allocated?

-Where do services overlap? What is the hidden cost of duplication?

-Would amalgamation cost more?

-How do services differ? Differing standards?

-Can municipal borders be changed? Power of Province within that?

-Could there be a ward system? Other models (ie. How did Toronto do it?

Ottawa too)-Is it possible to organize municipal services in a more rational fashion?

-What is the containment area of municipalities?-What/Who is stopping it? Who doesnt want it? How to provide localized

services?

What Could We Share? What Common Approaches Could We Take?


16/21

-library!

-policing/fire-arena ?

-planningeverything

-common approach to express needs to the Province

-bring back common sense to back a common approach

-transportation!!

-arts and culture (new concert hall for the region)

-responsibility for social programs, shelters, addiction services, affordable

housing

-common approach to involve the private sector, greater efficiency/more

available dollars.

-how to preserve diversity/uniqueness of communities and/or

neighbourhods.

Page 28:What We Dont Know:

1. Who wants amalgamation? Residents, service providers, politicians?

2. Who commissioned the study of amalgamation in the past?

3. What are the pros and cons of amalgamation?

4. What currently is amalgamated or shared services?

5. What has worked/not worked in other jurisdictions?6. What is the inventory in each municipality that could be shared?

7. What would it cost?

8. How can we amalgamate and maintain and protect the individuality

(unique personalities) of existing communities.

9. Who currently makes decisions about regional transportation.

Page 29:What Dont We Know:What would make sense?What is the cost of amalgamation?

What is wrong to begin with?

What are the inefficiencies?

If approved, how does process proceed to amalgamate?


17/21

How efficient or inefficient is current system?

What is our community?

What is distribution of taxes?What are the negotiables?

What is each municipality with government?

What is stopping us?

How do you retain diversity of neighbourhoods with amalgamation?

Do we need to look at areas if growth within region-density.

What influence does CRD have to do with local planning?

Taxes/ratio per municipalities

Communication between?

What are the negotiables?

What are the individual relationships with Provincial government?What is the fear?

How many overlapping by-laws are there?

Gross inefficiency.

Page 30:Sad: Present Situation

What Could We Share?Police, fire, needle exchange, costs, homelessness, cost of blue bridge,

parks and recreation, school board 61, maintenance, roads.

What Common Approach Could We Take?Health standards (needle exchange, costs, homelessness)

Police, Fire (regional force)

Cost of Blue Bridge (toll if not Victorian)

Maintenance Roads (fix potholes together)

Page 31:What Could We Share?City Councils and Staff


18/21

Police

Fire

Maintenance Yards and EquipmentStandardized Licencing and Permits

Long Range Infrastructure Planning and Building

Regional Transportation Planningregional planning, period!

Shared Regional Mission.

Library facilities

Recreational Facilities

Purchasing Power

School Boards

Affordable Housing and Dealing With Homelessness

Common Approaches:Investigate those municipalities that have gone through amalgamation

process (what worked? What didnt work?)

Start disbanding all the silos within each municipal hall so cooperation

starts at this level.

Articulate joint values (especially re: land use and shared vision)

Provincial government must re-instate effective regional planning.

Notes on this Data:The group Greater Victoria Amalgamation Conversation strongly

believes that community engagement on all levels is necessary to ensure

vital, relevant, and visionary decision making.

For this reason, we chose to invite the public to engage in convivial

conversation about their thoughts and ideas around the topic of

amalgamation. At the meeting, the attendees were promised that theirconcerns would not go unheardthat the group would ensure that a

report would be prepared on the basis of their comments and presentedto councils, interested groups and individuals, regardless of whether the

group continues in its current form, or not.


19/21

This report is written to honour our promise to the many people who

attended the Community Conversation, discussed their ideas passionately

and respectfully and who took the time to write for themselves andothers, these thoughtful comments.

Consequently, what we see emerging as a public involvement discourse

here was formed or guided by two very simple questions: what dont we

know? And what can we share? These questions were presented in the

hopes that the attendees would be able to transcend dualistic pro/con

discussions. And, judging from these insights, the questions were

successful. In that sense, the comments and ideas in this report came

from a relatively pure, undiluted raw public involvement exercise.

It is important to note that this report does not claim any scientific

objectivity or statistical representation of the populace of Victoria. Whileit can be considered embedded, social action research, its findings are in

no way indicative of the relative importance of the issues, nor does this

report claim any particular legitimacy as a basis for future decision

making. The report does, however, provide a snapshot of what issues,

concerns and ideas that some engaged citizens, who were willing to

devote their evening to having a conversation on how best we can work

together, concluded.

There were no people invited specificallyother than conversations we

may have had with members of the public. All attendees probably learnedabout this meeting through either print or radio media. There was also an

advertisement placed in the Times Colonist on the Saturday prior to the

event and posters distributed to communities.

At the most basic level, the Greater Victoria Amalgamation Conversation

could have fulfilled its commitment by presenting the actual white poster

papers as the report. However, we were mindful that rolled poster papers

are bulky, unorganized and impractical to engage with.

Consequently, we have decided to present the results in a series of mini-

reports: Where Attendees Reside Currently, comments left on smallerpieces of paper are in the document Questions/Comments and the bulk

of the responses came in from the tables, these can be found, labeled

both numerically and alphabetically in no particular order in the document

table writings: A, B . The editing process here was non-existent, since


20/21


21/21

amalgamation conversation notes

Documents