Counterpoint: Question #26
The Lindsay Post is running a weekly series of questions, with answers by both the "Yes" and "No" sides of the issues.

---

Question #26:
If we could turn back the clock, and could write a fresh referendum question, how would that question be worded?

---

      How many of you remember the Saturday afternoon matinees at a local theatre; a couple of hundred screaming kids, the smell of popcorn hanging in the air and smoking only in the smoking loges, please?

      The black and white western movie usually featured a stage coach carrying gold bullion from the mine. The bad guys were waiting up the box canyon to rob the gold and terrify the school marm. We kids would yell at the stage driver not to go into the box canyon, but would he listen? Not a chance.

      A "No" vote to keep the City of Kawartha Lakes is our equivalent of the box canyon. Once we're in it there's no escape.

      A "Yes" vote is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to control our own destiny. A return to our roots can be a new beginning. Local reorganization and local amalgamations can take place where the residents of our communities want them to happen and where they make sense.

      Our colleagues on the left side of this page will tell you that study after study proposed local amalgamations and they never materialized. Facts don't support the "No" side's argument.

     The voluntary union of Bobcaygeon and Verulam proves that amalgamations can take place where there is the will to make them happen. So does the agreement of Laxton- Digby- Longford to merge with Bexley and Somerville townships, and the agreement of Carden and Dalton to join together. These voluntary agreements were aborted by the Harry Kitchen forced merger of all sixteen municipalities.

      Something that the "No" side won't tell you too, is that most of the studies on local reorganization proposed a two-tier system with the County of Victoria as the upper tier and a variety of numbers of lower-tier municipalities.

      Is there a better question than the referendum question which will be on the November municipal ballot? The choice which we have is hard to beat. Do you like the mega-city? Vote "No". If you want any other structure, vote "Yes". This gives us a chance to pick up where we left off with a made-in-Victoria-County solution.

      One of the recommendations to the Minister of Municipal Affairs from the Max Radiff panel, was a supplementary question on the referendum ballot: "If the answer to the main question is "Yes" do you agree that the former County of Victoria and its 16 lower tier municipalities requires some further restructuring, yes or no?"

      A "Yes" answer to that question would have sent a clear signal to local councils to explore voluntary amalgamations with neighbouring municipalities which share common interests.

      However, even without the extra question on the ballot, local amalgamations will take place if they make sense and if local residents want them. Through the councils we elect, we can take responsibility for our own destinies. If our councillors don't listen to us we can remedy that problem ourselves through the ballot box. What we don't need is another Harry Kitchen.

      There's a box canyon coming up, folks. A vote "No" dooms us to the mega-city forever. A vote "Yes" keeps all of our options open. This time, let's veer off and bring the stage coach safely home.