Amalgamation

[bgb_ca]

Why not do what Chatham-kent did and call it Kitchener-Waterloo or KW for short?

[jeffster]

If Waterloo is included in the amalgamation, the name will be Waterloo. People don't know Kitchener and if you say Cambridge people think England (old or new) and probably never Ontario.

If I were the one picking the name though, I would call us Grand River.

I haven't met any Canadians that haven't heard of Kitchener. From the USA, sure. Outside Canada (in the US), Waterloo shares the name with a city if Iowa, so American's are familiar with Waterloo, just not the Canadian version. I don't mind the name "Cambridge", and I think it has enough recognition, being that it's on the 401.

Personally I don't want the amalgamation, but if it happens, it happens. Unsure of what the name would end up being.

Kitchener because it is by the far the largest city. Generally, as with Hamilton and Toronto, the largest city was chosen as a name.
Waterloo because it is also Waterloo Region (as Waterloo didn't choose a separate name from the region).
Cambridge because of the 401, and is relatively a newer name (1973). It also might be the only thing to get Cambridge onboard.

Grand River is an interesting choice. Not the first time I have heard that. Grand River Transit, for example, so it might make sense.

[MacBerry]

From D'Amato: Amalgamation is coming

The only remaining decision will be what to call the new super-city. Kitchener is the largest city in the cluster. But Waterloo has more recognition from outside. Cambridge? Don't be ridiculous.

https://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/...is-coming/

Ouch

Berlin ? ? ?

[panamaniac]

Why not do what Chatham-kent did and call it Kitchener-Waterloo or KW for short?

From D'Amato: Amalgamation is coming

https://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/...is-coming/

Ouch

Berlin ? ? ?

No, that ship has sailed and its return could be uncomfortable.   Waterloo is the obvious choice, since the Region is already "Waterloo".  Plus it might soothe the aggrieved burghers of that city, who would be loathe to see amalgation.

[Lens]

I think I good chunk of the quarter million Kitchener residents would reject the Waterloo name, myself included. It should be new name, if anything. I think Grand River fits the bill

[ijmorlan]

This is another reason to do a piece-by-piece move of services to the Regional level. It completely avoids the need for any discussion of naming.

Because of the existence of the Region, I consider any promotion of full amalgamation to be idiotic. If there are things that are better at the Regional level, move them there. If the cities eventually end up with little to do, that’s OK, and if the residents eventually decide to do away with the individual cities, that should be up to them, but it won’t be a big deal financially at that point because they will already be significantly reduced in scope.

Unfortunately, the current provincial government’s modus operandi is to do idiotic stuff.

[jamincan]

I also think full amalgamation is stupid. Certain services should be upgraded to the region - notably libraries and fire services - but I still see value in having better local representation that can be more responsive to the needs and desires of that community. Wellesley's distinct from Kitchener's distinct from Cambridge.

If we were amalgamated, I'm one Kitchener resident who would be voting for Waterloo as the name. International brand is valuable, and Waterloo has better recognition. Something entirely new is probably the worst-case scenario.

[ijmorlan]

The airlines refer to Kitchener only. If you try to enter Waterloo into a search in Expedia or Travelocity you won't find it. You will find Waterloo, Iowa. The signs at the airport in Calgary say Kitchener. It used to be the same in Chicago.

That made me want to remind myself what the airport is actually called. According to their website, they are the “Region of Waterloo International Airport”. So the airlines are wrong and should start calling the airport by its correct name. Did it used to be called “Kitchener”? I note that the YKF code appears to be based on “Kitchener”, although I don’t know where the “F” comes from.

[Spokes]

Why not do what Chatham-kent did and call it Kitchener-Waterloo or KW for short?

Berlin ? ? ?

No, that ship has sailed and its return could be uncomfortable.   Waterloo is the obvious choice, since the Region is already "Waterloo".  Plus it might soothe the aggrieved burghers of that city, who would be loathe to see amalgation.

I think the people who are opposed to it are going to be opposed to it and a name choice won't change much for them.

[jgsz]

The airlines refer to Kitchener only. If you try to enter Waterloo into a search in Expedia or Travelocity you won't find it. You will find Waterloo, Iowa. The signs at the airport in Calgary say Kitchener. It used to be the same in Chicago.

That made me want to remind myself what the airport is actually called. According to their website, they are the “Region of Waterloo International Airport”. So the airlines are wrong and should start calling the airport by its correct name. Did it used to be called “Kitchener”? I note that the YKF code appears to be based on “Kitchener”, although I don’t know where the “F” comes from.

Many airports don’t include the city name so that would preclude a consistent standard.

[danbrotherston]

@Spokes Indeed, I'm far more concerned with it not happening, or at least, it happening competently than I am about the name.

Frankly, I think we're basically doomed here....

[MidTowner]

I think a very good case can be made for amalgamation here. I also don't think it's a foregone conclusion. If anyone has any evidence of the current government or anyone in particular in the current government having it out for regional municipalities, I'd be curious about that.

I really do think that this is a case of the political bent of the government of the day making them naturally suspicious of a situation in which parts of the province have to operate with additional levels of government. But I also think that's fair: is it likely that, without a review, all of the Regional Municipalities are currently operating in exactly the areas they ought to be?

So, while I know this prediction is not as interesting as the conspiracy theories, and would not make as good a headline as the Record editorial, I bet the result of the review will be that some lower-tier municipalities are amalgamated, some Regional Municipalities are given added responsibilities or directed to negotiate added responsibilities, and perhaps one or more are dissolved.

[danbrotherston]

I really don't think it's much of a conspiracy theory to say that Ford is a highly politically motivated and incompetent leader. This is based on evidence of his entire political career.

I'm sure there are some moderating forces, but even those who I had the most respect for have proven that they're entirely unwilling to stand up to Ford in any meaningful or public way...

Now that doesn't mean that your prediction is right, only that I have little hope that the changes will be based on evidence of what's best, as opposed to political goals, nor do I have much hope that the changes will be positive.

Like I said before, whether you believe that amalgamation has the potential to be good or bad, I think we all know that it could be done badly and have negative consequences for our region...and Ford is not someone I would trust with my lawn care, let alone planning an amalgamation. I'll point out that he has already cancelled critical transportation infrastructure that most of us are only debating on whether it's utterly destructive, or merely extremely limiting to the potential of our region.

[Spokes]

@Spokes  Indeed, I'm far more concerned with it not happening, or at least, it happening competently than I am about the name.

Frankly, I think we're basically doomed here....

Doomed in that it's coming?

[Spokes]

I think a very good case can be made for amalgamation here. I also don't think it's a foregone conclusion. If anyone has any evidence of the current government or anyone in particular in the current government having it out for regional municipalities, I'd be curious about that.

I really do think that this is a case of the political bent of the government of the day making them naturally suspicious of a situation in which parts of the province have to operate with additional levels of government. But I also think that's fair: is it likely that, without a review, all of the Regional Municipalities are currently operating in exactly the areas they ought to be?

So, while I know this prediction is not as interesting as the conspiracy theories, and would not make as good a headline as the Record editorial, I bet the result of the review will be that some lower-tier municipalities are amalgamated, some Regional Municipalities are given added responsibilities or directed to negotiate added responsibilities, and perhaps one or more are dissolved.

This is an interesting idea.  I'd be curious how they would justify a some but not all amalgamation plan.  Did you have something specific in mind?