Ask the candidates
Our final question : Is the question of West Kelowna as a separate city settled for all time, or would you support re-consideration of amalgamation with Kelowna?
MAYOR: MARY MANDARINO: Nothing is cast in stone. Now that we are 10 years old as an incorporated community, it is time to ask our residents, if they wish to revisit the amalgamation issue. A new study would take four years to complete. The main advantage to amalgamation has always been the access we would have to greater dollar access to government grant money, also known as tax payer dollars. In my opinion, this would reduce the increasing tax cost to taxpayers but still allow West Kelowna to have its own identity out of respect for the pioneer families, the original settlers of Westbank, Lakeview Heights and Casa Loma.
GORD MILSOM: After knocking on well over 2,500 doors during the past several months and after having many in-depth conversations with both long-time and new residents, I was energized by the so many positive comments about our beautiful community. I believe that amalgamation is no longer an issue under consideration, as it was at the time of the founding of our new city over a decade ago. Instead, I believe in the continued success of our community, one of the most beautiful places in the world, and a community with endless potential.
CITY COUNCIL: PHILIP AKINS: No. Although I would never want to say that my mind is closed to good ideas and persuasive arguments, those arguments would need to be very persuasive for me to support such a reconsideration. At this point I have no interest in, or enthusiasm for amalgamation. We have a great thing going in West Kelowna, and I see incredible opportunities ahead. It is on those that I will be focused if elected to City Council.
JEROME CHUNG: With a 10-year time frame of running as a separate corporation and has been in the black with our budget, I don’t see why we want to amalgamate with the City of Kelowna. Besides, they have their handful of problems and issues to tackle lest alone to run another zone that they have neglected in the past that, for this reason, the residents of West Kelowna decided in November 2008 to separate from Kelowna.
RICK deJONG: Over the past 11 years, West Kelowna has grown and moved forward as a community. Basic infrastructure needs such as water, sewer, roads, and sidewalks are being addressed. Improved local amenities such as hiking trails, walkways, sports fields, pickleball courts and a water park are happening. The City of West Kelowna has a unique and different identity from our neighbour across the lake. I do not support re-consideration of amalgamation with Kelowna. West Kelowna, let’s continue to move forward together!
BRAD DOBBIN: West Kelowna citizens already decided that.
RUSTY ENSIGN: Seriously? During the 2007 referendum, I was a member of the Westside Incorporation Team. We campaigned on local control and keeping our money here. At the time, the projection was to be paying $85 more than the City of Kelowna in seven years. Eleven years later we pay $120 less in taxes than the average house in Kelowna. We decided not to amalgamate with Kelowna and look at all the improvements. The one thing I didn’t expect was how incorporation adversely affected the application process. If re-elected I will continue to improve this through our development services review.
DOUG FINDLATER: West Kelowna as a separate entity will endure. WK is about 30 years behind in upgrading infrastructure from rural to urban standards. City of West Kelowna is gradually getting those upgrades done and has the appropriate infrastructure master plans and 10-year financial plan to carry this forward to get it done. Kelowna has a completely different set of priorities that simply do not meet West Kelowna’s more basic needs and WK infrastructure upgrades to urban standards would simply not be addressed at the same rate as our own city is doing them.
JASON FRIESEN: I believe that West Kelowna should remain its own city. There is no doubt that there may be some efficiencies with regard to staffing and some of the other redundancies that would be eliminated with amalgamation. However, I believe that West Kelowna is unique and that we would lose some of that through amalgamation. West Kelowna is a resilient community and with the proper vision and planning, we will work through the tough times ahead and at the end of the day will be stronger because of it.
JOE GLUSKA: I live in West Kelowna. For me there would have to be a major demand from residents as well as a long list of benefits, in order for me to support revisiting amalgamation.
STEPHEN JOHNSTON: In my mind it is settled. We’re our own city now, one bursting with potential, surrounded by natural beauty and full of incredible people. A lot of hard work has gone in to setting up this municipality and I’m thankful for those that have laboured to do so. I want to see West Kelowna become a place full of opportunities for people of all ages. We have a lot to be proud of and even more to look forward to in the future. I would not support re-considering amalgamation.
ROSALIND NEIS: All-time is a long time. I would not consider amalgamation at this point, but the future is hard to predict. By 2050, if we still have a planet, things may look completely different. TIFFANY PARE: Did not reply. WINSTON WAMMER: I believe the answer to that question lies in the lap of both councils West Kelowna and Kelowna. How would amalgamation be of better value to either community? If it were beneficial to both, then let’s explore that idea. If it is detrimental to either community, then let’s not go there. There are differing opinions on both sides of the bridge and I respect them both.
GORDON WIEBE: No question is “settled for all time.” Citizens have a right to choose a governance model that best serves their community(ies). That can change over time. Amalgamation was rejected 10 years ago. However, all of the big issues facing Central Okanagan residents (traffic, policing, crime, homelessness, safety and security, urban planning, economic development, health care, education, pollution, etc.) would best be addressed by a central civic authority (the Greater Kelowna area?). Otherwise we’ll have six civic bureaucracies feuding with each other. Until then, it makes sense to “harmonize” bylaws, policies and application procedures.
BRYDEN WINSBY: Although one should never say never, at this point I have no interest in revisiting possible amalgamation with the City of Kelowna. After nearly 10 years in office, I believe firmly that much of what we have achieved, especially in terms of infrastructure improvements, would have been impossible had we amalgamated. Just witness how long it took for improvements in Kelowna following its forced amalgamation with outlying areas such as Rutland and Okanagan Mission during the early 1970s. Then there is our relatively seamless integration of several irrigation districts, an issue that still vexes Kelowna more than 40 years later.
CAROL ZANON: West Kelowna was incorporated in 2007. We are a growing, thriving, wonderful city that offers a vision for the future. I do not see us going through such a regressive process. Lake Country tried it, and that should be a reminder of how not to spend taxpayers’ money. Well into our future there could indeed be a change, some higher form of regionalization such as there is in Toronto and Montreal, and would require rewriting of existing provincial legislation.
JAYSON ZILKIE:We are our own city and I am product of West Kelowna. I grew up on the westisde, now West Kelowna, and am proud to call it my home. I love the fact we are a smaller city and that we are creating our own identity. I believe we can create a strong community and identity that is all our own, and a place where business and families can grow and thrive.