Real estate guru Bob Rennie suggested 'rebranding' New Westminster recently and revived the age-old city debate.
The Royal City moniker is dated, stuffy and just doesn't sound cool, according to those who want a new nifty 'branding' of New Westminster.
We've been through this squabble several times during the last couple of decades. And every time someone suggests ditching The Royal City as a 'brand' folks come swinging to defend it. (For a great take on this, check out Royal City resident Shelley Fralic's column in The Vancouver Sun).
But is this just about a 'brand' or name? Or is this a bit of a power struggle in the city between the old guard and the nouveau residents?
We think it's a bit of both. Some newcomers to the city see The
Royal City's enduring traditions such as May Day as outdated as a wringer washer. They equate tradition with extinction. While some may have been drawn to the city because of their love for heritage homes - it stops there. Young families, we are often told, aren't interested in the history of the city, but want to create new 'youth-centered' activities. They poo-poo traditional service clubs such as Rotary as closed shops for the wing-tip shoe set. This is understandable. Traditional service organizations don't do a great job of pulling in newcomers. Networking often ends up being a who-knows-who thing, and for new residents, it looks pretty exclusive.
Surely this city is big enough for both long-time residents to contribute to our city and for newcomers to contribute as well. Must there be 'branding' of each other by age?
Some newcomers seem to be equating tradition in the city with 'has-beens'. While oldtimers seem to be getting their dander up over some new ideas, and potential changes.
Surely we can call New Westminster, New West or The Royal City without discounting those who built the city and continue to serve the city well. And, we're equally sure that there's plenty of room, and need, for new folks to bring their ideas and contributions to the table.
Good cities are defined not by their 'branding' but by how engaged their citizens are and how they build on everyone's contributions. We'd really rather see a healthy conversation on citizen engagement instead of one on marketing or 'branding' New Westminster.
