TOBIANO – Passing referendum on firehall is essential, says TNRD
(Image: TNRD)
Residents and property owners in Tobiano will have an opportunity to attend one of two public meetings on June 23, 2026, to discuss next steps in planning to build a permanent firehall in the community.
A purpose-built firehall is required to continue fire protection services in Tobiano, and public assent will be required to approved borrowing funds for construction of a new hall. The Thompson-Nicola Regional District (TNRD) and Diverse Properties have reached an agreement in principle for a parcel of land to be donated to the TNRD to build a new firehall, according to a news release today (June 16, 2026). The property is located at the corner of Colebrook Road.
A tentative referendum date for Tobiano has been set for Oct. 17, 2026, in alignment with the 2026 civic elections. In this public assent process, residents and property owners in Tobiano would be asked whether they are in favour of borrowing funds to construct a firehall. Information will be confirmed following consultation at the upcoming community meetings.
There are two options to attend community meetings regarding the proposed Tobiano firehall project and referendum, which are listed below.
- Online: June 23, 2026, 1:30 pm | Meeting link: tnrd.ca/tobianomeeting2026
- In-Person: June 23, 2026, 6:30 pm | Tobiano Presentation Centre (38 Rue Cheval Noir)
“It is crucial for the Tobiano Fire Department to have a permanent facility to use as a firehall with proper room for turnout gear, fire trucks, fire apparatus, changerooms, washrooms, and other relevant spaces of a rural firehall,” stated the news release.
“If a purpose built firehall cannot be established in the community due to a failed public assent process, and no other feasible options are determined, the TNRD may be faced with no other option but to end fire service in the community.”
For more information about next steps in firehall planning and the upcoming public assent process, visit the TNRD’s webpage: tnrd.ca/tobiano-firehall.
ArmchairMayor.ca 
Governments vary greatly in population size so I don’t think setting an arbitrary number straight across the board is a suitable solution for the AAP epidemic. However, what I think is a reasonable solution is if we go back to the 5% threshold that WAC Bennett installed in the ’60’s rather than the 10% threshold Gordon Campbell came up with 40 years later.
I also think it’s unconscionable to be having an AAP at any point in the last year of a term let alone 5 months prior to an election as both the TNRD and the city of Kamloops both recently did.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s puzzling why the TNRD chose to hold a referendum for this project yet is using an AAP for the proposed search and rescue facility.
It would be good to know the reasoning behind the use of AAP vs referendum.
In my opinion, local governments should impose a maximum project cost (say, $50 million to be generous) for AAPs. Everything else should be decided by the more democratic referendum process.
LikeLike