amalgamation

Waterloo will not vote on amalgamation, as per Council

Some disappointing news out of last night’s Council meeting in Waterloo – our elected city councilors think its best to not ask the citizens our opinion.  Hmmmmmm…..   Regardless of if you’re a pro or con on amalgamation, shouldn’t the voters get to debate and decide?

Waterloo votes down merger question

By Brent Davis, Record staff

WATERLOO — The prospect of merging the cities of Kitchener and Waterloo may have died Monday night with Waterloo council’s decision not to ask for a referendum on the issue.

After hearing from several delegations — most of whom spoke against the idea — and speaking passionately about the issue themselves, councillors ultimately defeated the motion in a recorded vote.

A group of more than 60 local business and community leaders asked Waterloo and Kitchener to seek permission from the provincial Minister of Municipal Affairs to hold a referendum in this fall’s municipal elections.

The question the group proposed is: “Would you support members of council engaging in a dialogue about the merits of merging Kitchener and Waterloo? Yes or No?”

Kitchener council has already voted in favour of the move.

Two weeks ago, Waterloo asked for more time to consider the issue. Last night, Mayor Brenda Halloran and councillors Mark Whaley and Ian McLean voted for the motion. Voting against were councillors Scott Witmer, Jan d’Ailly, Karen Scian, Angela Vieth, and Diane Freeman.

Freeman said the issue had been considered and rejected several times in the past, and only served to divide the community.

“We say things about each other that are hurtful and that are destructive,” she said.

Halloran, on the other hand, said it was necessary for the citizens of Waterloo to have their say.

“How do we move forward if we don’t allow people to have a voice?” she asked.

Prior to the vote, council heard from several members of the public.

“There is no groundswell of support from either the citizens of Kitchener or Waterloo,” argued Stan Rektor.

Several people voiced their concerns about differences between the two cities, especially when it comes to conflicting approaches to environmental preservation and urban development.

Rosemary Smith, executive director of the Kitchener and Waterloo Community Foundation, and a member of the group advocating for merger talks, had urged council to pass the motion.

“I believe it is a discussion we must enter into in earnest,” she said. “Help us set the stage for an important conversation about our future.”

After the vote, Smith expressed her disappointment with the results, but said there was still work to be done.

“The citizens of Waterloo have not yet spoken, and until they do, I think it’s still alive.”

I am in favour of the referendum; what do you think?

amalgamation

A Cambridge perspective on Kitchener Waterloo’s amalgamaltion

The following is a guest post by Vince Jelenic. You can find his contact info at the bottom of the piece.  These views represent Vince’s opinion; if you’d like to share yours, please contact me.  This post originally appeared at More on Kitchener Waterloo’s possible Cambridge-less amalgamaltion

Hi, I’m Vince Jelenic, a resident of Cambridge, and owner of a local business called Green Spot Antiques – TwoJJs.  Benjamin asked for some of my thoughts on the recent talks about the possibilities of  Kitchener & Waterloo municipal amalgamations.   My viewpoint is one of a general resident of the region, and I claim no expertise or special interests.

The fact that two municipalities such as Kitchener & Waterloo (KW) would at some point amalgamate is a given, or almost.  As an outsider when I travel to KW I see only one city.

When I was a child, my mother used to clean houses for wealthy Toronto residents in the Avenue Rd & St. Clair area.  I remember how when we got to ALMOST our destination, there would be a second ticket to pay on the streetcar.  There was this invisible line somewhere on the road, and if we crossed it , it cost more.  Sometimes on nicer days, we would “choose” to walk the few extra blocks. That extra ticket line functioned as a reminder how the two sections of town were connected, but quite distinct, both in terms of wealth, provenance, and services. 

In KW today, there is still a two-ticket zone mentality but in the end it is the consumer who pays – each citizen.  There are many areas where rationalizations and savings could be obtained through amalgamation, and even standards of service raised to equivalent standards.  This is a good thing.  Toronto outgrew it’s two-ticket zones years ago,  KW should too.

Recent talks have indicated how Cambridge, the third partner in this Region of Waterloo, is not to be privy to these talks.  I understand this is by choice and by design.  We, in Cambridge have been very reluctant interlocutors with regards to amalgamation of our municipalities. 

While some of it may be due to the fierce pride of local residents, and their ties to history, I think it is more due to the “marginalization” rationale. We are at the “ends of the earth” for the Region, at it’s borders, so to speak.

We sit on the outskirts of Waterloo Region  — with our City Hall in Galt, the southernmost part of the three municipalities. So let’s call us “outskirters”, just for fun.

We, in Cambridge, are also made up of three smaller village cores, each with it’s own sense of history, and there are internal struggles within our own municipality for services. Witness the previous debates on  the “proper” placement of our new City Hall .

For Kitchener, was there ever a doubt as to where their new City Hall should be?   Yes, give or take a block, perhaps. Kitchener has a downtown; we don’t -not really. 

And that is the problem of “critical mass” which Cambridge has to live with.  As part of the Region, we can very seldom benefit from new initiatives because we cannot bring critical mass to the table of needs and benefits. We have a tough time doing that even within our own municipality. 

Most services are built from Hubs, made sustainable, and then extend outwards to reach all an area’s citizens.  Cambridge will never be the Hub of this Region.  We know that, and fear it.

A KW amalgamation puts Cambridge in the very disadvantageous position of now dealing with a true HUB mentality up north of the 401, an economic powerhouse..  While Cambridge is oft-times under represented today in Regional Government, we can only imagine that representation being further eroded in the “new Region” with KW amalgamated.

In all countries, “outskirters’ are often the last to benefit from the gains of their economy. It is a natural occurrance due to fiscal and resource restraints.  On the other hand, outskirters are first to be courted to by the neighbours.  Of course, both parties, would love the free flowing tax dollars from the “outskirters” for their own. 

As an immigrant from a border area I know that feeling well. I come from Istria, a peninsula close to Trieste, Italy, and our conquerers (friendly neighbours) have changed a multitude of times since before the early Romans. A fiercly proud populace in a veritable “no man’s land”. 

If we look at Cambridge geographically, and culturally,  we probably have more in common with our southern neighbours such as Paris& Brantford,  than we do with Waterloo or Kitchener today. In terms of distance, both are closer to Galt than Waterloo is, for example. Perhaps a KW amalgamation is a good thing, it may help Cambridge reconsider it’s struggles with the north and make us concentrate on increasing our collaborative efforts with the south. 

While the Region markets Waterloo & Kitchener to the world, and the HUB of activity grows with leaps and bounds to the north of us, perhaps we can make OUR little neck of the woods a more pleasant place to live.  So much so that the go-getters from Waterloo will consider Cambridge a prime place to reside, even if they have to work in Waterloo. They may even take comfort in our historic downtown and river settings. 

Cambridge has a choice here: either remain an “outskirter” in Waterloo Region, facing a tougher and larger opponent to the north, or become a HUB of it’s own for a different concept of growth.  

We are a small town.  We should stop acting like a big city.  So far, in doing so, we’ve not only lost our identities, our downtowns, but also our shirts – our economic drivers.

I believe KW amalgamation will have the effect of finally putting the roaring Cambridge dog to rest so that it concentrate on it’s own house a little more and make it a more lively and comfy place.

However, it should be kept in mind that within the Region, “taxation without proper representation” will lead to larger problems later.  There are many instances where the “centralization” or “regionalization” of services has lead to a total disregard for Cambridge interests. To continue down that path during a KW amalgamation period would only add obstacles in the way of a productive change.

So, yes, please leave Cambridge out of it. It’s best for all parties. There is much to be said in recognition that one’s place in a partnership will not actually lead to profit.  It puts a stop to wasted energy. 

Cambridge is full of energetic people, and is a great community.  It just might begin to concentrate on itself more.