06-16-2020, 12:02 PM
(06-16-2020, 09:56 AM)tomh009 Wrote: A dumbass name, by today's standards, yes. But don't we have better things to do than start arguing about a name change? Would we really get a much bigger turnout (than 15%) for a new vote on a name?
As the mayor said, "I think what's more important than what the name was, and the reason it was chosen back then, is really what our city has become."
What I would say is that the actual name change was completely bogus, and done in an undemocratic way. My understanding is that “leave the name unchanged” wasn’t even on the referendum, and it was a multi-option referendum, which requires ranked balloting or some similar arrangement to be democratically valid. The low turnout doesn’t help.
Additionally, my impression is that the person after whom the city is named is not someone we would want to name a city after.
But that being said, it’s all history, and there are much more important things to do than rename it now. Especially right now, as opposed to sometime in the next few years.
Anyway, if we keep moving services to the Regional level, the city and its name will just naturally become less and less important over time.