Talk:Rutland, British Columbia

History: Amalgamation with Kelowna.

Skookum has a source that, in a very abbreviated manner, claims that the merger was in 1984. I was living in Rutland at the time of the involuntary merger in 1973. I don't know what event in 1984 BCGNIS (his source) is referring to. It may be that the name "Rutland", discarded in the merger was resurrected as an official community.

Rutland was not a municipality prior to the merger. Services were provided by the provincial government and by several utility "districts" that charged directly for water etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gossg (talk • contribs) 08:55, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the information, I'll let BCGNIS know, I'm in touch with them for error-corrections of this kind. It's a one-woman office and she's swamped so don't know when the correction will be in place...you're probably right about the name being restored as an official neighbourhood, and it's not the first name wiped off BC's map (Genstar tried to do that to Silverhill recently....and lost).Skookum1 (talk) 10:41, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it was me who attributed that, but reportd it and got this reply from BCGNIS:

Absolutely nothing here about amalgamation within City of Kelowna (or “merger” as described on the talk page), and certainly nothing that could reasonably be interpreted as “resurrecting a name that was discarded in a merger”....

The name “Rutland” has appeared continuously on maps and in government records since c1900; in the early days the name was symbolized on maps as a “town” (in the colloquial sense – Rutland was never incorporated as a Town Municipality); symbolized as a Post Office/Railway Station between 1955 and 1984, then in 1984 a decision was made to more accurately symbolize the name as a community....

I lived there at the time. Post Office became "Kelowna R" in 73, and when postal codes came in, even the "R" disappeared. The tiny train station at the propane exchange never had a name visible from the street. Shrug. I'm happy enough with the main article. Gossg (talk) 02:22, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I"m going to remove the phrase "There was no official founding" as a non sequitur with little context worth keeping.Skookum1 (talk) 18:21, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Agreement. Thanks. Gossg (talk) 05:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)