menthelius says...

I would most definitely agree with you DW, jeez I'm frustrated every time I vote, but it is one of the few rights we citizens have!

Look at the crud in Iraq and Afghanistan, people are dying just to stand in line and vote! But they are still trying to vote, they KNOW it's a GOOD THING for them and it's a good thing for us!

Remember that a couple votes CAN change who gets elected, look at the recent close-run races where one person gets in with just a couple hundred votes over the opponent (wasn't it just a couple years ago when some riding in Vanc had to be counted three times and the winner was only 50 or so votes more?).

Of course if you decide not to exercise your democratic rights (what little of them remain), I'm sure some third-world tinpot dictator would be happy to call you "slave", oh I forgot Milobar already lives here.

Posted on March 26, 2010 @ 8:43 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3562655 

Darrell Ward says...

sunshiningbrite - Have you ever been to a Country where they DON'T have the privilege to vote? I know you haven't, or you wouldn't make such a comment.
So, because they do something YOU don't like, the while democratic process sucks?
Hey, all politicians at all levels of Government have done LOTS of things I don't agree with - but I would never, NEVER associate that with not voting.

Posted on March 26, 2010 @ 5:13 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3562613 

sunshiningbrite says...

to all the people i tried to convince over the years that they should vote, you were right. it IS a waste of time. no wonder less and less people go to the polls every year :(

Posted on March 25, 2010 @ 7:25 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3561975 

DocMuzak says...

One COULD argue that, if Politicians were "totally" honest during their campaign, they would likely not get voted into office. It's like they say in the movies: "You couldn't handle the truth!"
You have to keep in mind that when you are running for an office, you (like anybody) have no way of knowing what really lies ahead. This MAY result in having to change your point of view on things, and THAT is surely going to make some people angry and accuse you of lying.
Not saying that some Politicians AREN'T crooked or motivated by questionable sources (that would be naive) but those who DO change their point of view, even for what one could consider a VALID reason - are usually labeled as dishonest, even if they try to explain the rationale, the general public will stick to the "liar" label.
Unless of course, the "change of view" ends up turning out for the better, then the whole "liar" label will be forgotten and that politician may very well get voted in again.
That's all I'm saying.

Posted on March 25, 2010 @ 5:45 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3553302 

saywhat says...

I agree menthelius.If politicians did as they promise during their campaigns,then I would be more confident they would represent us well.Regretably they only say what we want to here and then to heck with our opinions later.I won't upset DW by saying they are all liars again but enough are to prove the point.

Posted on March 24, 2010 @ 9:06 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3545528 

menthelius says...

Nobody is asking for multiple referendums, personally I don't want to waste money on another one either, but I think lying-politicians should respect the referendums that have already been held! If this Milobar and the 7 stooges on council don't like the previous decision, then give the people another vote, but I forget that the public is incapable of making a decision without allowing emotions to cloud the issue (not my view, but other posters here seem to think the public cannot make an informed choice).

Posted on March 24, 2010 @ 7:36 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3545506 

Docmuzak says...

rwethereyet - another person who has to start with personal attacks when they actually have no factual argument.

OK - my posts are garbage and YOURS are all correct. You are always right. YOU are the smartest person I have ever seen.

Feel better?

Posted on March 24, 2010 @ 5:46 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3545475 

rwethereyet says...

doc, about all i can manage to suffer through is the first line of your garbage posts to.
Its not us, its you !

Posted on March 23, 2010 @ 2:53 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3525250 

DocMuszak says...

Cdnranger, You just read the first line of my response - didn't you.

See, that's why I don't like debating with you. You admit you don't want to do any research, so the facts could be right in front of you and you refuse to see or acknowledge them. I just hope you don't decide one day that the sky is purple...

Posted on March 21, 2010 @ 6:53 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3509456 

DocMuszak says...

Wow Cdnranger, YOU asked the question. If Council had to keep holding referendums for everything, that would cost a fortune.

Why are you complaining about spending money on something like this when you see no harm in waisting it in multiple referendums?

Reading your past posts, I see several contradictions. Time to get into the new Millennium my friend. Also time to move on to another subject. You lost on this one...

Posted on March 21, 2010 @ 6:48 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3509455 

Cdnranger says...

Darrell Ward, just because YOU don't like referendums is a pretty flimsy excuse not to hold one.

At least the Colosseum decision was made by having a subsequent vote or 2 or 3 until the majority was persuaded it was a good idea. An example of how democracy SHOULD work.

Posted on March 20, 2010 @ 6:48 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3509433 

Darrell Ward says...

That's a good question Cdnranger - I don't like referendums.
They tie the hands of future council members, cost you and I extra money, have to be held again if/when things change - and things do change! (Economy, population, resources, laws, public view, etc.)
That's why we VOTE for representation. The only time I would agree on a referendum would be if council was deadlocked. Then I would say it should only be good until the next election.

Nobody has chosen to answer my question about Riverside Coliseum... It was voted down twice in referendums, but I don't hear people complaining now that we have had some great events there that we otherwise would not have experienced.

Posted on March 20, 2010 @ 6:06 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3509354 

Cdnranger says...

Once a matter is put to a referendum it should never be overturned without a subsequent vote. It can be held at the same time as civic elections for very little additional cost.

Darrell Ward, how long do you think a referendum is good for?

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 7:12 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3509329 

rwethereyet says...

The city says the cost of the meters will be 14 million, they will be wrong as usual, and I bet the meters in the end cost closer to 20 million.
Then repairs, replacements, reading them, billing, etc.
It would be cheaper to just build a water treatment plant.

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 5:27 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3508558 

menthelius says...

Well you know "bendover" I have a hard time disagreeing with your post, even the part about this computer system having a mind of its' own!

For the record, I was not against ACC either, I simply wanted more explanation regarding the location of the proposed site.

Also for the record (as I stated so many bloody times) I'm NOT against water meters per se, I'm against the method by which they have been imposed on us! I personally have no fears regarding my water usage rates, I already practice some pretty extreme conservation methods, as any responsible citizen should!

I am however somewhat miffed at people that insult on a regular basis just because I don't agree with their opinions! You want an adult debate, that's cool. You want to sling mud and names around, don't be surprised when I reciprocate.

Hey "grouchy" spare me some of your meds, the world is a pretty rosy place isn't it?

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 2:57 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3508497 

BenDover says...

I guess my last post was dropped...again. (this site sometimes has a mind of it's own ) Ok, I'll try again. Apparently a referendum's shelf life is 10 to 20 years, maybe we can get it down to 5 or so. Once again, menthellus, I am NOT anti-Domtar. How many times do I have to state that. I AM anti-valley stack. Do you think there is a difference there ? I do.I lived in this freakin' town since BEFORE the mill was here, so I know what it was like before and after the high stack. Anyone who is not opposed to the low stack proposal either has a vested interest, is getting paid off or is an idiot.Sorry for the insult but there it is. I was not for or against the ACC proposal but i was sorta leaning toward "for" because of the science, the disposal of a product that needs it and the fact that they had to jump through an impressive list of hoops to get approval. What I have always been against was the targeted campaign of misinformation, scare tactics and fear mongering brought on by the media and opponents. I was also very disappointed in our local / provincial / federal politicians showing what spineless weasels they are capable of being. I also found it highly ironic and hypocritical of the council to so adamantly oppose ACC and rubber stamp anything by Domtar. That further proved who pulls the strings in this town. While I was against Bronwen Scott for her ACC opposition, I am behind her on the Domtar issue. I believe it is FAR worse than having an ACC-type plant. Do we need Domtar's jobs and taxes ? Of course we do, they contribute a lot to this town but that does not give them the right to do whatever they want. How long do you think they will be here? They WILL eventually leave and then we will need other companies to pick up the considerable slack. Part time, minimum wage jobs in the service industry are not the answer. Bottom Line?...I wanted to see an even playing field and ACC did not get it. Am I p****d off that ACC is going ?, no, I'll live, it wasn't that big a deal for me either way, my problem was the different rules for different people mentality that prevailed. Anyway, I'll agree with Grouchy...double up on your meds for a week or so....and as DW said...wash 'em down quick, before you're "on the meter".

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 1:39 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3508480 

Grouchy says...

Can anyone spare some medications for Menthelius ? I think this water meter decision has really pushed him over the edge.

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 12:41 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3508476 

menthelius says...

Hey "grouchy" and "bendover" how about that Domtar stacks proposal?

You're right, some people just can't lose gracefully, how many years have you been whining about Domtar...

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 10:50 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3508459 

menthelius says...

DW according to an article in the Kelowna newspaper (re: borrowing money for new police station), local referendum would cost around $15000.

Water meters are going to cost around 14 million for the initial outlay, add in the costs of maintenance, staffing, and replacement and who knows how much the bill will end up costing.

Also, unless the city restricts any new construction and prevents any new residents from moving here, the water upgrades are going to happen in 8 - 10 years. How much will that cost?

A somewhat unrelated article concerning Montreal Island states that residents there use around 1100 litres per person due to leakage of old pipes.

City staff have been trying to locate a major leak in the pipes in Juniper Ridge for the last year and a half, without any success yet.

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 10:48 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3508458 

lrem22 says...

It appears Menthelius, that you are the one with more opposition. A nine year old referendum isn't viable in such a fast changing world. Maybe if you accepted that the water metres will be installed you will stop being so rude.

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 10:42 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3508456 

Darrell Ward says...

Amen BenDover! My prediction is that this will be a non-issue by this time next year.
(We should start a pool...)

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 10:03 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3508449 

Darrell Ward says...

rwethereyet - be careful what you ask for. Things can change a lot in one year, let alone 10 or 20. What if you owned a store and found that to compete, you HAD to be open 7 days a week. Using your way - you'd have to move your business to another city.

Grouchy - I wasn't for or against the ACC. (I know the science and have seen it first hand, but also know the power of mass hysteria).
It just appeared to me (rightly or wrongly) that most who were against WMs were also against the ACC.

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 9:59 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3508448 

Grouchy says...

You go BenDover ! I agree with you 100%. You also irem22,. Just let it go people , there will be something new to whine about right around the corner. And while I think about it, the ACC thing is truly sad, we will pay the price in the future.

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 9:31 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3508436 

rwethereyet says...

A referendum should be good forever... or if in say 10 to 20 years they want to hold another one, and the new one gets a majority of votes going the other way.

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 9:24 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3508433 

BenDover says...

Geez, some people don't lose gracefully, do they ? Wasn't that referendum in '01 ? No matter, wasn't it ex-Mayor Mel who decided to waste the time and money on a foregone conclusion ? Does everyone whining today forget that the council back then overturned a vote by the previous council in order to further their agenda? Anyone remember the doom and gloom predictions in the mid-eighties when this town was debating the Sunday shopping issue ? According to some people it would signal the breakup of the family unit, the road to Godless anarchy and the end of civilization. Seems rather stupid and pointless now, doesn't it ? See where I'm going ? The people opposing this seem to have a sense of entitlement and there head up their a**. In a few years, this too, will be a non-issue. Wait and see.

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 8:30 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3508417 

Darrell Ward says...

Democracy is dead? So, the ACC pulling out doesn't count, right?
Let's focus on the stuff we don't agree on. Heaven forbid we should be happy, celebrate a victory and (oh my gosh...) smile.
:0)

I have a couple of questions for those who keep bringing up past referendums:
1) How long should a referendum be good for? 2) Any idea how much it costs the tax payers to hold a referendum? 3) How accurate does a referendum reflect the want of the general population (silent majority or vocal minority?)
Sorry, but I keep thinking about how two referendums voted down Riverside Coliseum and now EVERYBODY seems to have attended something or other there.

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 8:30 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3508416 

menthelius says...

When you decide to shut up, let everyone know "irem22", then maybe your opponents will do the same.

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 7:24 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3508011 

lrem22 says...

Oh please, when are people just going to accept the fact and let it go and move on.

Posted on March 19, 2010 @ 6:46 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3508007