47 replies to this topic

[Bernard]

The Amalgamation Yes group did the ground work for asking the questions but with out something pushing them, I think many of them thought it would just go away.   Ever poll or survey over the last 30 years has shown a majority support in every municipality where the question was asked so it is not a huge political leap to realize that a person on the ballot as Pro-Amalgamation would have a very good chance of winning

[VicHockeyFan]

Wesley Kennedy will be the pro-amalgamation candidate in View Royal.

Natalia Nebedynski will be the pro-amalgamation candidate in Colwood.

[VicHockeyFan]

CFAX reports that Pro-Am has three candidates total.  ^ Above, plus Sooke.

[wetcoastace]

Do you think some people who would otherwise support the vote would not support the candidate? I mean will there be concerns that a by-election will result soon after the election, or what's the plan here for the duration of the four year term?

You break it, you own it.  That 's the "plan" and it says  quite a bit about the politial naifs touting this idea.

[wetcoastace]

Yes, I don't doubt this.  Seems it was very effective, maybe more so than the other pro-am group.  Although the latter did lots of groundwork.

Neither  group did the ground work they should have done.  Neither group made the effort or did the work to get actual, demonstrable evidence of interest in or support for amalgamation.  Despite years of effort in AY's case, and considerable funding from downtown Victoria business interests (and support-in-kind from what passes for "the media" in Victoria).  The presentation of a petition with a threshold number of valid signatures is the benchmark and both of these "organizations" KNOW they can't make the grade..  So we get tricks, opaque funding, vague promises and evasions, and emotional, but meretricious, appeals to a "democracy denied". Anyone paying attention to politics in Victoria AND British Columbia should be viscerally terrified by any idea that has the support of the BC Liberals, especialy any idea that will be implemented in areas where they can't elect a dogcatcher.

[LJ]

CFAX reports that Pro-Am has three candidates total.  ^ Above, plus Sooke.

Are they/we making the assumption that everybody not a pro am candidate is against the idea?

[VicHockeyFan]

Neither  group did the ground work they should have done.  Neither group made the effort or did the work to get actual, demonstrable evidence of interest in or support for amalgamation.  Despite years of effort in AY's case, and considerable funding from downtown Victoria business interests (and support-in-kind from what passes for "the media" in Victoria).  The presentation of a petition with a threshold number of valid signatures is the benchmark and both of these "organizations" KNOW they can't make the grade..  So we get tricks, opaque funding, vague promises and evasions, and emotional, but meretricious, appeals to a "democracy denied". Anyone paying attention to politics in Victoria AND British Columbia should be viscerally terrified by any idea that has the support of the BC Liberals, especialy any idea that will be implemented in areas where they can't elect a dogcatcher.

 

They had a professional poll commissioned.

[wetcoastace]

They had a professional poll commissioned.

No, they had a professional polling organization prepare a "bought and paid for" study, disproportionately sampling City of Victoria and Saanich residents.  As is almost always the case in these "are you in favour of my plan" polls, the results were exactly what the buyers ordered.

Seriously, I am far more interested in and active in political discussion than the average citizen by choice and the idea that 84% (I believe that is the mumber) of Victoria residents are actively in favour of amalgamation, without a plan, without any discussion ,without anything at all, is ludicrous, counter-intutitive, and flies in the face of both the attendance at AY "information" presentations and attendance and feedback at the various municipalities.  This is textbook single-issue, pressure group, tactics by a far-from-transparent organization with much more support from self-interestd downtown business groups than from individual citizens.

[VicHockeyFan]

^ Why sugar-coat it though?  Why not tell us what you really think?  

[rjag]

No, they had a professional polling organization prepare a "bought and paid for" study, disproportionately sampling City of Victoria and Saanich residents.  As is almost always the case in these "are you in favour of my plan" polls, the results were exactly what the buyers ordered.

Seriously, I am far more interested in and active in political discussion than the average citizen by choice and the idea that 84% (I believe that is the mumber) of Victoria residents are actively in favour of amalgamation, without a plan, without any discussion ,without anything at all, is ludicrous, counter-intutitive, and flies in the face of both the attendance at AY "information" presentations and attendance and feedback at the various municipalities.  This is textbook single-issue, pressure group, tactics by a far-from-transparent organization with much more support from self-interestd downtown business groups than from individual citizens.

 

I think you are missing the point....the poll was performed based on municipal % population of the CRD, hence why Saanich received a higher number of responses compared to Oak Bay etc....It was an independent poll performed by a professional group.....yet the CRD and City of Victoria & Saanich accept polls and studies performed by the cycling coalition as fact and integrate the results into their long term planning.....how come you aren't objecting to those studies?

 

I understand your position...but can you deny a non-binding question be asked of the population (I reiterate....non-binding)

 

441 adults from respondents in the 13 communities that comprise the capital region were surveyed online between July 16 –17, 2014. The sample is balanced to census on age and gender. A probability sample of this size would carry a margin of error of a +/-4.7%, 19 times out of 20.

 

 

Key Findings of the Angus Reid Global Poll

These findings are taken directly from the ARG report and can be found in the last few pages.

 

• Overall, 84 per cent of respondents are in favour of amalgamation (50% are strongly in favour; 34% moderately in favour)
   
• 89 per cent of respondents support a non-binding referendum on amalgamation
   
• 80 per cent support having an independent, comprehensive cost-benefit study and analysis of amalgamation
   
• The top 3 most important issues facing the CRD today, according to respondents are: “sewage/waste water management” (56%); “coordination between municipalities” (52%); and “transportation” (44%)
   
• Over one quarter (26%) of respondents say there should be only one municipal government; 25 per cent say there should be four or five; 21 per cent say there should be three; 7 per cent say there should be 13
   

Amalgamation Pros:

 

• The top main benefits of amalgamation, as perceived by respondents, are: “reduced governance costs (e.g. paying fewer city councilors)” (43%); and “better regional planning and decision making” (39%)
   
• The top perceived positive impacts of amalgamation are: “public transit” (75%); “garbage and waste management” (74%); and “the efficiency of municipal service delivery across the Capital Region” (72%)
   

Amalgamation Cons:

 

• The top main negatives of amalgamation, as perceived by respondents, are: “larger municipalities will dictate to smaller ones” (31%); “loss of local representation” (30%); “loss of local identity” (29%); and “risk of bigger government in the end” (28%)
   
• The top perceived negative impacts of amalgamation are: “the character of your individual community” (37%); “the quality of municipal services you receive in your own municipality” (24%); and “the quality of policing in your own area” (22%)
   

Satisfaction Levels:

 

• Over three quarters (77%) of respondents are satisfied with the quality of services provided by their current municipal government. 65 per cent of respondents say they get between “good” and “excellent” value for their tax dollars
   
• 62 per cent of respondents say the CRD gives them between an “only fair” and “good” value
   
• Just over half (56%) say the CRD does between an “only fair” and “good” job of working with their own individual municipality
   
• Almost half (49%) say individual municipalities are doing an overall “poor” job of working together at the CRD level
   
• Almost half (47%) say an increased role for the CRD is a good idea; 35 per cent think it is a bad idea
   
• Respondents are split regarding their overall satisfaction with the CRD: 43 per cent are satisfied, 54 per cent are dissatisfied
   

Agree or Disagree:

 

• 90 per cent of respondents agree that “having 13 municipalities and a total of 91 mayors and councillors just doesn’t make sense”
   
• 84 per cent agree that “costs for larger projects should be shared by all municipalities”
   
• Over half agree that: “amalgamation will save taxpayers money” (67%); “having the CRD organization with its staff and board members is just too much expensive government” (65%); and “all municipalities should share responsibility for ensuring the downtown Victoria core is looked after” (65%)
   
• 77 per cent of respondents do not agree that “the status quo is working; we should leave well enough alone”
   
• Over half do not agree that: “amalgamation just isn’t at the top of my priority list when it comes to local government” (53%); and “I’m worried about fewer services and less responsive government if we amalgamate” (52%)

[wetcoastace]

^ Why sugar-coat it though?  Why not tell us what you really think?  

Is there any point in telling anyone what you don't really think?  Especially on a topic that has been elevated to "top 3" in this election?

[wetcoastace]

I think you are missing the point....the poll was performed based on municipal % population of the CRD, hence why Saanich received a higher number of responses compared to Oak Bay etc....It was an independent poll performed by a professional group.....yet the CRD and City of Victoria & Saanich accept polls and studies performed by the cycling coalition as fact and integrate the results into their long term planning.....how come you aren't objecting to those studies?

 

I understand your position...but can you deny a non-binding question be asked of the population (I reiterate....non-binding)

I'm not missing the point at all - I'm suggesting that touting the results as what all Victorians want when the sample is skewed to only 2 of 11 municipalities is disingenuous, more so when one of those municipalities is the one after the tax revenues.

Denying the very well documented correlation between buyer objectives and poll results is equally disingenuous.

I'm not objecting to THIS study, I'm arguing that the interpretation being made of it by AY and otehr amalgamation supporters is unwarranted and unsupported by the facts.  I'm not objecting to THOSE studies because we are talking about amalgamtion and they aren't relevant.  That said, whether one agrees with those studies themselves or not, their results do not create the same kind of cognitive dissonance the CoC/Hotel Owners/AY study does.

Yes, I can, and do, reject the concept of spending tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money (extrapolated from the Central Saanich estimate) to get non-binding answers to 8 or 9 different questions in a time frame that is far too short to allow intelligent consideration of an incredibly complex question because a handful of individuals have FAILED to obtain a demonstrable amount of actual support and want the rest of us to pay for them to get what they hope will be leverage to get the province to interfere and dictate.  This is not democrcay in action as they claim, it is exploitation of the process by a [tiny but vocal] minority.

[Mike K.]

Now that you've got that off your chest, let's wait for the election results and take it from there.

[rjag]

 

Yes, I can, and do, reject the concept of spending tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money (extrapolated from the Central Saanich estimate) to get non-binding answers to 8 or 9 different questions in a time frame that is far too short to allow intelligent consideration of an incredibly complex question because a handful of individuals have FAILED to obtain a demonstrable amount of actual support and want the rest of us to pay for them to get what they hope will be leverage to get the province to interfere and dictate.  This is not democrcay in action as they claim, it is exploitation of the process by a [tiny but vocal] minority.

 

Not sure where you are getting short timelines from.....if the results of the referendum are in favor of a study then it may be another 4 years before a binding referendum would take place.....

 

Also this tiny but vocal minority....not sure where you get that from ....yes a small group of individuals invested the time to promote an idea but .....every non scientific poll performed by the media etc always seems to obtain similar results in the 80+% range in favor of something different than what we have currently.....so lets have a non-binding referendum and see what the people say....that's democracy

[LJ]

 

 

Wouldn't we assume that most people in Victoria proper would want some form of amalgamation? A poll should have been taken of all the other muni's, but I guess that is what is happening with the question on the ballot.

[LJ]

Are they/we making the assumption that everybody not an official pro am candidate is against the idea?

I had to quote myself because this still isn't clear to me.

[Mike K.]

No not necessarily, each candidate has something about amalgamation on their platform, or should. I'd take it to mean that if someone doesn't then they're against the idea.

[LJ]

So if all/most of the candidates are in favour why bother running a one issue candidate?

[Mike K.]

Voting for the pro-amalg candidate sends a direct message. Voting for candidates who also support or may support amalgamation doesn't necessarily imply the voter was in support of that one issue on their platform.

[LJ]

Maybe, but most people won't vote for a one issue candidate so all he would do is perhaps siphon votes from viable candidate who also supports amalgamation, and could actually get elected and try to do something about it.