West Kelowna Naming Referendum

[angusog]

Jo, at least after tomorrow the voting will be done. However, the name game is still a long process.

Fancy, I agree with this, and it is for that very reason that I want some of the less-frequent posters to have a chance to voice their opinions!

I'm asking only that the major users of this thread abstain for awhile in order to give others a chance. I have watched others try to join in the conversation only to be completely drowned out by the very long and often hostile posts by the thread regulars.

It'll be good to hear from others - assuming they still come around and aren't permanently turned off the idea of posting in here - and it'll be good for the regular posters to sit quietly and listen for a bit.

It's the day before the ballot Jo!

[Jo]

It's the day before the ballot Jo!

Yes, and that realization is what made me think it was time (overdue) to let other people post their feelings on the matter, should they choose to do so.

After all, it can probably be said that you thread regulars have managed to get your views across to some small degree.

That sentence could be in Ripley's World Records as the greatest understatement of all times.

Thanks for understanding, everybody. It could turn out that the thread will now lay dormant, with nobody filling in the space left for them, but I'm willing to take that chance, at least for today.

[parachute]

Jo, I suspect that you might classify me as one of the regulars whom you wish would stop posting here. Whether you do or not I will stop after you allow me this one last insert, thanks.

I wonder if there is anyone out there who doesn’t think that this entire process of name selection has degenerated into a complete fiasco? That is just too sad and much too bad, but I would not put the blame on any one person --- it has been a joint effort of many (in my opinion) that this effort has come unglued.

I have agreed with rturner for a long time – we are rushing this decision. Let’s slow down.

My hope is that tomorrow we will elect a Mayor and six councillors who will step back, look at what has transpired, and say to all of us that Council will not make a choice. Just STOP! Re-think how we can get to a point where a LARGE majority of westsiders (not simply 50 plus 1 percent) agree that a proposed name is the right answer.

If I was the “boss of the world” I would insist that a new naming committee be formed. The only citizens allowed on my committee would be people who are presently rabid WESTBANK supporters. I would allow the committee 4 months to propose ONE (and only one!) name to Council. The only stipulation would be that the name proposed to Council must NOT be “Westbank”. Any other name that the committee thinks best would be accepted.

[Jo]

Actually, this works pretty well, we're getting excellent 'closing statements' from people. I'm happy with it, and besides, nobody seems to be jumping in to fill the void, as I hoped they might do.

[occasional thoughts]

Hi from Arizona, all. My closing comment, distilled from my few posts, and with the growing wisdom of time passing (ok, I'm laying it on a bit thick here, but sincerely . . .) is that Westbank undoubtedly has the primary "historical" based claim to our naming, and I wish it well, but I think the name we should take, if not Westside, should be West Kelowna for any number of reasons. And I also think that we may wish to revisit this again in the future, depending on how things go tomorrow night and thereafter at council. Because it was rushed at the behest of the CoC which wanted a certain name to get marketing with.

My primary irk about this thread is that a certain pro-Westbank advocate didn't try to reason and persuade with people who disagreed with him, and maybe listen to the other side and acknowledge the odd point as well, but attacked each and every one of the people who were not voting his way. We'll see tomorrow night whether his tactics worked or not.

. . . and to all a good night.

[angusog]

*I take this to be your closing statement, then/Jo*

Hi Jo,
This point was raised last week and now appears to be a hot issue!

Re: Westside Naming Committee
by inquisitive on Nov 10th, 2008, 10:52 am
After a little head-scratching I ask a question for a better meaning of the process for name selection. "If a voter puts an X in the slot for NO name change,but then goes on to add an X against one of the new names, isn't that a spoiled ballot?" If so, then both X's should be ignored.
Is there a legal opinion out there that will stand up in court?

Re: Westside Naming Committee
by rturner on Nov 10th, 2008, 11:01 am
Same process was used in the governance referendum; first vote change or no change, second vote for an option if change happens. The Ministry considered and allowed it.

Re: Westside Naming Committee
by parachute on Nov 10th, 2008, 11:04 am
inquisitive, no, I would not say the ballot was spoiled. I view the NON-BINDING QUESIONNAIRE as asking first of all do I want to keep WESTSIDE, then if the majority of voters answer this first question as: “yes, change it” (which may or not be the way I voted on question 1) then I would like my answer to the following question to be taken into consideration by their “lordships”, the Council members.

Re: Westside Naming Committee
by angusog on Nov 10th, 2008, 11:08 am
If you vote for no name change inquisitive that in effect is a vote for Westside is it not? Then if you put a second X against another name, won't that be voting twice! How many chances do you expect in this process? I don't know if it will stand up in court but you only have to ask someone at the polling station and I'm sure they will advise you of the correct procedure.

Re: Westside Naming Committee
by canadman on Nov 10th, 2008, 11:11 am
This is an opinion poll, not a binding referendum. No different to any opinion poll. You are permitted to answer both questions regardless of what your answer is to either.

The result of this poll is merely to give Council the information they wish to receive from which to make a decision.

You may however only choose to answer one question (either one), but it will not be a spoiled ballot no matter how you answer.

Re: Westside Naming Committee
by angusog on Nov 10th, 2008, 11:34 am
What weight do council attach to waffling voters since in effect it gives two chances to express an opinion instead of one? Do they have a crystal ball with which to decide which vote is to be counted? I will still be voting for Westbank only as this other issue can only serve to cloud the process which is what the Naming Committee tried in vain to accomplish but failed thankfully.

Find out yourself before you vote and do not trust those who have something to gain! If your vote is spoiled it will do no good to say "canadman told me it was o.k."

[brightstar]

The District had a responsibility to inform the public of how the voting process works in regards to this "public opinion poll". They unfortunately have done a poor job of that. If Findlater and his cronies get voted back in, I fear they may twist and turn the poll in whatever way they can to see that it works to their advantage. It's a mess! Findlater got us into this and he damn well better find a way to get us out if he becomes Mayor (God help us). I've seen huge support for the name West Kelowna all across the Westside, so if the result comes out any other way, I would be awfully suspicious of some tampering...and you can be sure, I will personally ensure that an investigation takes place!

[Fancy]

The ballot wasn't hard to figure out at all. Mark no more than 6 for council, 1 for mayor and choose yes or no for the changing the name and mark the name you want if the name is to be changed. A spoiled ballot would be one that had more than the alloted marks allowed. If you choose not to answer the second part of the opinion vote, your choice - same as if you were to not choose all 6 council members.

[Bestside]

The two questions on the ballot are simply two separate questions.

You simply treat them as that. Their relationship to each other is for the voter to decide.
The vote counting machinery cannot form a logical relationship between the two and cannot make any decisions as to what you do or do not vote for.

It is similar to these questions:
1. Would you like to go to town? yes or no.

2. If you are are made to go to town with your parents, what flavour of one ice cream cone would you like?
Vanilla?
Strawberry?
Licorice?
Heavenly Hash?

By this you can see if the majority vote "yes" to go to town, then you are going if you like it or not.
So if you vote no, and you still have to go to town with the majority, then you get to participate in the flavor of that. You can go with one of two ancient flavors, or you can go with one of the two newer flavors that are easier to market.

That is the rational for voting for both questions, and you are rewarded for doing that, but only if you like ice cream. If you don't like the options in question 2 you might decline to answer. If you don't care one way or another about question 1 you might decline to answer. This works when the two questions have no direct relationship. One is traveling, one is consuming.

But your vote for a new name has a downside that makes the process questionable and therefore the confusion.

The confusion is that if you vote to not change the name "Westside" in the first question, then it is only logical that you would vote for the name "Westside" in the second question. But "Westside" is not one of the options in the second question. Why not?

The results in the first question is a simple majority, the results in the second question is a plurality. No matter how you measure these results, the actual opinion of the electorate cannot be easily measured unless the voter is restricted to only answering one of the two questions or by including the name "Westside" as a choice together with the other four names in the second question. For example:

If 10,000 people vote, you could have 5,100 vote to change the name to something else, and 4,900 vote to retain the name Westside. So the simple majority of 51% want a name from the list of four names in question 2.

However, by the rules established this means the name is picked from the second question. So the 4,900 are disenfranchised and lose their vote for Westside, and are forced to place a second choice vote with the 5,100 for another name. The entire 10,000 voters, or a mixture of yes and no voters from the Westside question, can vote in the second question.

In the second question, with a plurality result, you could have:
A. 3,100 vote for one name and 2,300 for each of the other names. The 4,900 votes for Westside is greater than 3,100 but the votes for Westside do not count. 3,100 votes win the day.
or:
B. 5,100 vote for one name and 1,633 for each of the other names. But you don't know where the folks who were disenfranchised in question one placed their votes for a second choice. If the votes for Westside stood separate and apart there would not be 5,100 votes for that name, but it will win the day.

No matter how you slice it the voters who want the name Westside have been disenfranchised. The results have been manipulated. This is not democratic.

The five on council who gave us this flawed important document have flawed thinking. They say they did not talk about it behind closed doors or anywhere, so they do not know how to communicate. They collectively are not worthy of your vote. To re-elect any one of them is validating their ineptitude. That is always a mistake.

Angusog has put forward some logic. No one can say he is wrong because we don't know how council will evaluate these results. But Canadman is right in accordance to the rules. The unknown is what influence the losers will have on the council of the day when evaluating the votes. The ballot is so inept that there could be a court challenge. So how you strategize to place your votes for one or both questions may be a crap shoot. Be careful.

[gardengirl]

The District had a responsibility to inform the public of how the voting process works in regards to this "public opinion poll". They unfortunately have done a poor job of that. If Findlater and his cronies get voted back in, I fear they may twist and turn the poll in whatever way they can to see that it works to their advantage. It's a mess! Findlater got us into this and he damn well better find a way to get us out if he becomes Mayor (God help us). I've seen huge support for the name West Kelowna all across the Westside, so if the result comes out any other way, I would be awfully suspicious of some tampering...and you can be sure, I will personally ensure that an investigation takes place!

Tampering? Puhleeeez.
So if your side does not win, it must obviously be fixed?
Sorry, that is called democracy.

[Fancy]

It is similar to these questions:
1. Would you like to go to town? yes or no.

2. If you are are made to go to town with your parents, what flavour of one ice cream cone would you like?
Vanilla?
Strawberry?
Licorice?
Heavenly Hash?

Think it should have read (I'm having fun here)
1. Do you want to change the Vanilla ice cream you eat to something different? Yes or no.
2. If you choose to change the flavour, which one would you like? Pick One.
Strawberry
Chocolate
Licorice
Heavenly Hash

[angusog]

The District had a responsibility to inform the public of how the voting process works in regards to this "public opinion poll". They unfortunately have done a poor job of that. If Findlater and his cronies get voted back in, I fear they may twist and turn the poll in whatever way they can to see that it works to their advantage. It's a mess! Findlater got us into this and he damn well better find a way to get us out if he becomes Mayor (God help us). I've seen huge support for the name West Kelowna all across the Westside, so if the result comes out any other way, I would be awfully suspicious of some tampering...and you can be sure, I will personally ensure that an investigation takes place!

Foisted by your own petard! I've seen huge support for Westbank all across the Westside.

[Boda]

ballot is so inept that there could be a court challenge. So how you strategize to place your votes for one or both questions may be a crap shoot. Be careful.

It's only an opinion poll.

How could you legally challange an opinion gathering mechanism that has no consequences other than to be used by council as information gathering?

How does anyone know how (the yet unknown) council elect will interpete the info gathered?

[Jo]

Thank you to Canadman and parachute for understanding why I wanted the regulars of this thread to back off for awhile and let others have a better chance to post their views.

However, it has been pointed out to me that I only said they needed to stay off for one day (yesterday), so feel free to join in the fray once again. In fact, it looks as though we're already fully back to the same-old same-old sniping back and forth among a handful of people.

[canadman]

For those interested and out of respect for the moderators (though I've slammed them a bit in there as well) I've started a new thread just for election day rants... the carpet in this room is starting to look a little too ragged for me, I think we could all use a change of scenery. If Angusog comes knocking, just pretend we're not home.