Thanks to AAP op-posers (in favour of borrowing millions)

[Donald G]

Although I do not live in West Kelowna, this is turning out to be one of the more realistic strings in terms of discussing the issues involved. I particularly like the objective and evidently informed comments of kgcayenne, Urbane, Jim Dixon and Heather Yeats. (No offense meant to anyone else)

[Urbane]

Although I do not live in West Kelowna, this is turning out to be one of the more realistic strings in terms of discussing the issues involved. I particularly like the objective and evidently informed comments of kgcayenne, Urbane, Jim Dixon and Heather Yeats. (No offense meant to anyone else)

As someone who is undecided, leaning but undecided, I'm looking forward to this thread over the coming months. Let's look at the cost, let's look at the alternatives, let's look at the benefits of this proposal, and let's look at the deficiencies of this proposal. Lots to discuss.

[Ranger66]

I guess my first question is, how many of my tax dollars will go to the Mayor and council so they can have underground parking?

[0mni]

Lets not forget where all the money comes from. I'm sure most of the tax payers don't work in new offices. How about a new community centre for the taxpayers and their families to use,that way the council won't feel guilty taking the community hall from the community. How about a new H2o swim centre for the families of the tax payers, or wait how about just filling pothole on your road that you pay taxes for. when the mayor and council come before the needs of the tax payers something is wrong.
And yes I think a city hall is in order just not yet. Lots of empty buildings around lets renovate one. You could of had the old home hardware building, but maybe that wasn't good enough, look at it now its a beautiful building.

[heather yeats]

Urbane's post:
As someone who is undecided, leaning but undecided, I'm looking forward to this thread over the coming months. Let's look at the cost, let's look at the alternatives, let's look at the benefits of this proposal, and let's look at the deficiencies of this proposal. Lots to discuss.

Omni's post:
And yes I think a city hall is in order just not yet. Lots of empty buildings around lets renovate one. You could of had the old home hardware building, but maybe that wasn't good enough, look at it now its a beautiful building.


Councilor Neis comments from Castanet article

"Neis though did question who would really benefit from construction of the new city hall.

She doesn't believe it will be the residents of the city.

"A 100-seat council chamber. I wonder who that benefits. I doubt that benefits our citizens at large. I think it benefits our council and staff," said Neis.

"I truly believe this proposal extremely benefits the private developer. I don't know if there is a massive benefit to the public at large."

The above posts are really appropriate - especially as the Council have a window of opportunity to revisit and review the situation. The whole summer in fact. Who really benefits? The deficiencies need to be looked at .

Sadly, I feel that our Council and staff will just put their blinkers on and push forward without making changes. Anything else would be out of their comfort zone.

[heather yeats]

The Design of the Proposed City Hall is so boringly "in vogue" It looks like the Planned tourist Block in Kelowna. It is a greenhouse with a row of wooden angled beams sprouting from the front. These posts/beams remind me of the "lamp posts" on Bernard. "Modern Industrial chic" is the term used I believe.
Do we need an 'over the top' building for a City Hall?

How about investigating a simpler design? Save some money and plan for future needs?

The Heritage building on Brown Road is neat, smart and simple in design. It is a timeless well appointed building.

I confess that I know nothing about the construction cost per sq ft

I know nothing of the post construction maintenance costs - but feel that the window cleaning bill would be a lot less!

The building could be completed in stages,with extra floors added over time if necessary. That would allow for wiggle room without changing the city hall footprint.This option was used in Glenrosa Middle school when the third floor was added on.

Perhaps that option could be looked at?

I wrote letters to the Editor and letters to the Mayor and Council regarding the old Ace Hardware Building when it sat empty.
It seemed no one was interested. That would have been an opportunity to marry the works Yard and City Hall. Plenty of car parking and storage possibilities on site too.

I also understand that we cannot use building on First Nations Lands.That would be Like having West Keloqwna city Hall in Peachland,

[Ranger66]

“I wrote letters to the Editor and letters to the Mayor and Council regarding the old Ace Hardware Building when it sat empty.It seemed no one was interested.”


No one was interested because Mayor and most of council has made their choice. The reason they did not want a referendum is because they have a tendency to become a proxy election and incumbents tend not to do well in them.

[westbankkid]

Findlater and most of council are as useless as the ideas they come up with. They sound like sore losers. They thought they would win with the reverse approval and it blew up in their face. Hopefully people remember in the next election and turf them.

[occasional thoughts]

Just for the record, Mayor Findlater (and Coun. Neis) did not support using the AAP. The mayor is apparently strongly in favour of the project, however.

[Jonrox]

I confess that I know nothing about the construction cost per sq ft

I know nothing of the post construction maintenance costs - but feel that the window cleaning bill would be a lot less!

I really don't care which way this whole thing goes since I don't live in West Kelowna, but the above comments are exactly why this should never go to a referendum.

The average citizen has no idea of what construction and maintenance costs are, so aren't in a position to evaluate the long-term viability and sustainability of a new City Hall. I really don't understand why a bunch of voters with no experience should be making a decision of this magnitude or why they should have any input at all. If you know what you're talking about, then fine, your opinion matters. Otherwise, it shouldn't.

When you don't understand a situation (like the poster stated herself), she's making statements based on "feelings" rather than facts. It's a dangerous road to go down.

They elected people to make these decisions for them... that's how things work. If you don't like a decision then you should only get your say next time an election comes up.

[jetty1965]

The castanet article was careful to pick and choose only certain things that were said. Nothing was mentioned of Ophus statements and certain things were left out of what Neis and some of the other Councillors were said . a 100 seat council chamber is not that outrageous since over 200 people showed up at the open house and the space can be rented out for other meetings events etc, as was mentioned by one of the other Councillors.


The entire webcast is taped and on the website http://westkelownabc.swagit.com/play/05102016-927 refer to section 9.1.2.

As far as using other existing buildings such as Ace Hardware. The city must for any project put out requests for proposal,and then picks the one that best meets the criteria, cost etc. They don't just go knocking on doors asking if people would sell their property. I am not aware if Ace Hardware put in proposal or not. It is not always cheaper to renovate an existing building than to build new. It also limits your design/ functionality.

The purpose of going through a developer/ partner was to save money.

The added bonus to this project is Boucherie Center will be available once again for the public as a gathering place for all citizens of west kelowna.

[occasional thoughts]

I'm sure Jonrox is well motivated in what he says, and I used to hold vaguely similar views many years ago, but to follow it is dangerous for participatory democracy. If we only allow "qualified" electors to vote on anything, where does it end up? It is a feature of U.S. elections in years gone by, imposing literacy tests & etc. on would-be voters, that were used to discriminate against minority voters, Unfortunately, every "idiot" who wishes to cast a vote and who is otherwise qualified to vote may do so in elections and on matters of public policy and expenditure that are allowed to go to a vote, and that's the way it should be..

[jetty1965]

I'm sure Jonrox is well motivated in what he says, and I used to hold vaguely similar views many years ago, but to follow it is dangerous for participatory democracy. If we only allow "qualified" electors to vote on anything, where does it end up? It is a feature of U.S. elections in years gone by, imposing literacy tests & etc. on would-be voters, that were used to discriminate against minority voters, Unfortunately, every "idiot" who wishes to cast a vote and who is otherwise qualified to vote may do so in elections and on matters of public policy and expenditure that are allowed to go to a vote, and that's the way it should be..

For once I agree with you. Everyone should get a vote. It should be an informed decision based on facts. I have seen misinformation being passed around, and I find that frustrating. Including todays little letter that was posted, hats off to the twelve. If one was to watch the council meeting from May 10th its clearly stated nothing has been signed. Timeline 61:00

The $18 000 per month for delay is not a penalty as such , its a cost of living allowance. The developer has been holding on to this property and plans for more than a year. So what that is the cost is going up as long as it is delayed. I think that is just standard practice and makes sense especially in today's real estate market . Which is why I don't think waiting and saving up will benefit the city and may in the long run actually cost us more in taxes. Interest rates are low now.

The AAP was a vote, I do think the city should have put the form in with mailout. Perhaps an oversight. I do not think council was counting on apathy of the voters. I think they were worried about apathy of the voters. So if there is to be a referendum I hope we see a higher percentage than 30% like in the last election. And if people have questions attend the open houses or write the council and ask the questions. Read the frequently asked questions. Don't rely on the opinions of others or the sometimes rather bias reporting.

[jamapple]

I really don't care which way this whole thing goes since I don't live in West Kelowna, but the above comments are exactly why this should never go to a referendum.

The average citizen has no idea of what construction and maintenance costs are, so aren't in a position to evaluate the long-term viability and sustainability of a new City Hall. I really don't understand why a bunch of voters with no experience should be making a decision of this magnitude or why they should have any input at all. If you know what you're talking about, then fine, your opinion matters. Otherwise, it shouldn't.

When you don't understand a situation (like the poster stated herself), she's making statements based on "feelings" rather than facts. It's a dangerous road to go down.

They elected people to make these decisions for them... that's how things work. If you don't like a decision then you should only get your say next time an election comes up.

So, you're totally ok with taking it up the yahoo for a whole term, with a "nothing you can do about it" attitude? Jeesh!! It takes all kinds!
Maybe we should all just run for 1 term of office and get ourselves rich, with no recourse.

[pepsilover]

Province tells Council NOPE! Guess they agree with the NO voters :) It seems council is digging their heels in and making this City Hall a priority. When is the next election? We need people who are interested in what is good for the people, not the employees.

http://www.castanet.net/news/West-Kelow ... k#comments

<snip> The province has placed a large roadblock in front of West Kelowna's plans to borrow up to $10.5 million for a new city hall on Elliott Road.

The Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development sent a letter to the city Tuesday, denying the city’s request for an extension to the legislated requirement to hold a referendum on the City Hall Project Borrowing Bylaw within 80 days.

City council had hoped for the extension to hold a city-wide referendum in the fall, to avoid a July vote when many people are on vacation and the city is in the height of wildfire season.

At a special meet of city council Thursday, it was decided unanimously to re-start the process. That means the first three readings of the bylaw to borrow the funds for the city hall project were rescinded.

It means there will be no referendum in July.

Council was given the choice of holding a referendum in July, abandoning the project altogether or restarting the process. Council chose the latter.
<snip>