Referendum date almost here

Proposed location becoming more central

To the editor:

I keep reading that the location for the new West Kelowna city hall should be more “central.”

With another five or six hundred homes coming up in the near future on the west and north sides of Westbank city centre, where’s “central” going to be as time goes on?

There’s nowhere for new homes to be built in the Boucherie area, housing can only move farther west, as will the “real centre.”

If not now, when? Had the new city hall been built as soon as the change was done, it would have been a lot cheaper than waiting until now.

Thanks to the people at city hall for looking forward past the poor losers on the east side that didn’t get to join Kelowna. Besides, listening to the news or radio ads, we’re known as “Kelowna’s Westside” anyway.

Nick Tarasiuk, West Kelowna

Referendum smelling like a bad fish

To the editor:

Vote Connie Hodgkinson for Mayor. The headline on her letter in the Westside Weekly suggested “Something really fishy going on in referendum.”

The truth is the whole issue smells worse than a fish market on a hot day.

It has been rammed down our throats how necessary it is to have a civic centre and city hall, in keeping with the West Kelowna’s relatively new status as a city.

The mayor and council are so fearful of losing this referendum that they found it necessary to spend $25,000 of taxpayer’s money to promote a yes vote.

If it is true, as stated by Hodgkinson, that in 2014 the council finalized a contract with the Strategic Development Group for this development, then it would explain most of the paranoia the city has shown over the prospect of losing the referendum vote.

No matter what the result, it will always be questionable, in residents’ minds, why it was necessary to hold a referendum in the first place given that the initial borrowing proposal was previously defeated through the alternate approval process.

David Simmons, Westbank

Send city hall a message by voting no

To the editor:

Lorne Brown’s letter regarding the City of West Kelowna taking sides in the referendum is bang on the nail.

West Kelowna has been promoting their civic centre project on their website as well as on the mailout.

What is most galling and unfair, is that the city can spend $25,000 of taxpayers money (yours and mine) to promote only one side of an argument (theirs). That the taxpayers who do not agree with this project are also having to pay is unconscionable .

It is obvious that the only way to show the city that we all matter is to get out and vote no to massive borrowing.

West Kelowna has an expensive and uphill task ahead to bring its aging basic infrastructure up to date, as well as expanding and extending sidewalks, lighting and servicing all the other needs of a city.

Heather Yeats, West Kelowna

No side proposals will end up costing us more

To the editor: The no side has recommended 4 locations for a new city hall

1. Bartley Road and Stevens Road (industrial area),

2. Boucherie complex (remove more parking space to sports arenas),

3. Elliott Road operations. (limited cramped area between Highway 97),

4. Adjacent property to RCMP building. (limited cramped area between Hwy 97)

— What is the design and size of the city hall?

— Are they including parking, paving, and drainage?

— Are they including curb, gutter, sidewalks, and utility services?

— What are the costs — $15, $20 or $25 million?

We either vote for a proposal with a proper design, location, and size, including a known cost of borrowing $7.7 million.

Or, do we vote for a proposal the no side promotes that may cost taxpayers $20 million.

Ron Ganczar, West Kelowna