Voters on the South Island are facing unprecedented democratic whiplash.

Thanks to Premier David Eby and the NDP, residents are being forced to navigate parallel elections simultaneously. On top of sorting out 13 municipalities, the CRD, and local school boards, they must now sort out seven provincial ridings and a sudden influx of candidates.

Critics, including the municipal advocacy group Grumpy Taxpayer$, view the provincial decision as an unnecessary attack on democracy. Justifying an election two years early on the basis of an ‘existential’ tariff war is laughable, and frankly, so much horsefeathers.

What is certainly horsefeathers as well, is the political opportunism at play as a result of the chaos and leadership resignations among opposition parties.

The election call ignores the reality that local communities are struggling with an endless array of immediate issues. Those must be urgently discussed and debated fully by civic candidates and residents over the next few weeks, not sidetracked by the current provincial morass. The election could easily have waited a few weeks.

While legal and within the rules, calling an Oct. 24 election is arguably unethical and reinforces the cynical view of politicians in general. Instead, this unprecedented snap election has raised a lot of troubling questions that local residents want to fire right back at the government.

Chief among those questions is how local governance is being disregarded. While final counts for clear majorities aren’t done, the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM) described their call for the province not to hold a competing election as “overwhelming”. There are an estimated 3,500 candidates currently running for election across 161 municipalities whose platforms are now fighting for oxygen.

History shows that voters do not take kindly to this brand of opportunistic political gambling. When the Ontario provincial government tried a similar snap election maneuver in 1990, voters viewed the Liberals as arrogant and the election as entirely unnecessary. The government was resoundingly tossed from office, and even the premier lost his seat.

Eby’s gamble is particularly reckless given the fragile state of provincial finances. British Columbia’s credit rating has already faced five consecutive downgrades by major rating agencies thanks to record entrenched deficits and rising debt levels.

Most recently, the province’s first quarterly report projected the 2026-27 deficit to reach an astronomical $13.8 billion. A mere $450 million increase from February’s budget projection partly because of a government calculation error in natural gas revenue projections. Because downgrades greatly impact provincial borrowing costs, adding more debt right now is fiscal malpractice.

Yet, taxpayers are being left to foot a massive, unbudgeted bill for this snap vote. Back in February, BC Elections requested $50-million in supplemental funding to start getting ready, which was denied. That request had to be made again earlier in September, and that massive cost will be tacked directly onto our growing debt.

BC Elections put the cost of the 2024 election at $82.4 million, so $100 million this time around is within the realm of possibility.

Taxpayers will also be on the hook for indirect costs; BC’s generous 75 per cent tax credit for the first $100 donated to a political party means that millions in tax dollars will be diverted away from the public treasury and straight into partisan war chests.

Perhaps most concerning is whether BC Elections is even equipped to handle this rushed timeline. Chief Electoral Officer Shipra Verma explicitly warned the Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services that her office requires at least four to six months of lead time to be safely “election-ready.” The consequences of denying them that time, she noted, include “significant challenges in election delivery and ensuring integrity of the democratic process.”

In this moment of manufactured uncertainty, has there been a more breathtaking act of partisan political interest in the modern history of BC? That’s hardly what the Premier characterizes as a ‘firebreak’ against the challenges facing the provinces.

Calling a provincial election now takes political cynicism to its finest moment. It proves once again that power is the only thing that matters—not local government candidates, not municipalities, not voters, and certainly not taxpayers.

-30-

It can be an overwhelming task deciding who to vote for in the Oct. 17 civic election.

Only 31 percent of residents in the capital region bothered to elect mayors and councils in 2022 – the lowest turnout in the last five civic elections – choosing to skip a few minutes that could have changed their life.
There’s a seemingly perfect storm of issues and an abundance of candidates who want your support and may say whatever it takes to get it. But, it’s unlikely you will get to meet them when they are stumping and knocking on your door.

So rather than juggling the social media circus, grab a cuppa (maybe a double-shot of whiskey), and do your homework. Although some sources have biases, they merit consideration.

For starters, the province has assembled a Voter’s Guide to Local Elections (2026) and General Elections 101 which you may find helpful. Most municipal websites post candidate nomination documents, nominee lists, financial snapshots and candidate profiles. While most candidates have their own websites, those may provide only biased insights.

Vote Ready Victoria by resident John Farquharson is the newest source. For independent analysis, he knocked on doors in 2022 for several Victoria council candidates from across the political spectrum.

While using AI, six policy areas are flagged including housing and development, police crime and safety, taxes, budgeting and spending, plus governance.

The key votes on each during the last four years are detailed along with handy links to council minutes.

Livable CRD offers a candidate scorecard for a liveable (Canadian spelling) capital region, for what they say is an easy, informed election decision.

It’s self-described as a coalition of 14 community groups who prepared a transparent scorecard for municipal election candidates across the CRD, so voters can see where candidates stand on the issues that shape daily life. Candidates are asked their various positions.

These issue areas require tax dollars, so it’s unfortunate candidates were not asked their views on taxation. For example, ‘Should the rate of taxation exceed inflation?’ or ‘Should more services be consolidated across the region?’ or ‘Do you support zero-based budgeting?’

All said, it’s impossible for voters to make comparisons to help their decision. For example, as of Sept.12, only six candidates in the City of Victoria returned a questionnaire.

Traditional media such as the Times Colonist, Victoria News and Capital Daily will likely provide similar coverage to what was done in 2022.

The Times Colonist usually publishes brief profiles and unedited answers to a candidate questionnaire for Victoria hopefuls.

Last election this information was published the day before the election. Unfortunately little time remains for voters to do their homework and make an informed decision. Perhaps the media-of-record will publish it a week or two earlier?

Voters can also track down substantial candidate profiles done during the previous few weeks.

Victoria News and Saanich News along with two other Black Press regional papers, published a ‘Meet Your Candidates’ section in 2022 and asked candidates to talk about priorities.

While the candidate submissions are cursory, they are published several weeks in advance of voting day. There’s likely a similar database for 2026.

Again, online searching for candidate profile stories written prior to the election is another option.

Online Capital Daily also reached out to local candidates in 2022 with a survey providing basic information about themselves, and outlining their thoughts on local issues, from policing to public consultation.

Not all candidates chose to respond making it less helpful. It remains to be seen if they will launch a similar database for 2026.

Of course various organizations share their views on who they believe represents their best interests and which municipality is under performing.

Among them are the Chambers of Commerce which just released the Greater Victoria Municipal Report Card on six municipalities, and the Victoria Labour Council. Of note also is the analysis by the grassroots group Sustainable Victoria Network.

Community associations organize all-candidates meetings, a chance to judge candidates in the flesh. Keep in mind, community associations are often closely tied to councils who provide essential grants and fund some of their activities.

Good luck voters separating the worthy from the cringeworthy candidates, the future of our Wonderland is in your hands.

-30-

Redacted postings on the city website under the section ‘election candidates’ also show that five of the current councillors signed nomination documents supporting Alto.

Nominees for mayor or council need to be nominated by at least 25 nominators to be eligible.

As well, the so-called ‘Gang of Five’ of current councillors, also nominated each other to varying degrees as part of the nomination process.

To be very clear, there’s no wrongdoing or anything illegal in all these nominations.

It just seems the governance term ‘at arms-length’ takes on new meaning before the municipal election.

https://www.victoria.ca/media/file/alto-marianne-mayor-nomination-package-redacted

When you vote in the local election in a few weeks, ask yourself, ‘Is it for a ‘scandal,’ an ‘odium’ or a ‘windbag’ of politicians?’ Not surprisingly, there doesn’t seem to be any agreement on a collective noun for a group of politicians. A less derisive and our choice is a ‘confusion of politicians.’

While Metro Vancouver is aiming for a little less confusion, unfortunately there’s still plenty remaining in Victoria.

Pending provincial approval, the Metro Vancouver board will reform regional governance following a comprehensive, independent review by Deloitte Canada. It voted to reduce the unwieldy board size to 34 from 45 members in 2027 to help “improve decision-making speed, efficiency, and strategic focus.”

It’s creating a major projects oversight board, streamlining financial accountability, adopting a single sewerage area model, and so on. It implemented 24 of 47 recommendations from the initial 2025 governance review to cut redundancies, eliminate double meeting fees, and increase transparency.

Metro Vancouver serves more than three million residents living in 21 municipalities, one electoral district and one treaty First Nation.

Board membership to a maximum of three directors per member jurisdiction will be capped, which also requires formal provincial approval to take effect. While some board votes are unweighted, others like financial decisions and major projects are currently based on one for every 20,000 population or portion thereof.

Here in our Wonderland, the Capital Regional District hasn’t seriously reformed its regional governance and its 24-director board in decades.

Both the Governing Greater Victoria: The Role of Elected Officials and Shared Services (2016) by the Fraser Institute and the Capital Integrated Services and Governance Initiative (2017) for the province, failed to result in significant changes at the CRD.

These governance related reports still sit on a dusty shelf somewhere.

The CRD includes 460,000 souls living in 13 municipalities, three electoral areas, and the traditional territories of multiple First Nations.

The number of directors at the CRD is not fixed by a hard numerical cap; rather, it is determined by population formulas. While some votes are unweighted, others are based on one for every 5,000 population or portion thereof.

When compared to Metro Vancouver, clearly there’s a disproportionate number of regional politicians on the South Island. Let’s also ask how the board can claim any regional electoral legitimacy in the first place?

Local governance is delivered by a large ‘confusion’ of politicians, a description that will fit even better after local elections in October.”

The public was told the mayor’s base pay from Esquimalt will be hiked by 20% to $84,776 after the fall election.

The mayor of the township also automatically sits on the CRD board in a separate role as a director which significantly boosts overall compensation. After all, Esquimalt taxpayers help pay for the salary indirectly through regional requisitions from the CRD.

In 2025, the current mayor was paid $34,538 including expenses by the CRD, according to the annual statement of financial information. But following a recent remuneration review, the next mayor will receive an additional annual stipend of $3,069 to the base pay.

Councillors will also see a pay hike of 13% to $33,910 in November, based on 40% of the mayor’s salary.

In 2025, councillors were paid $31,658 plus expenses, according to the annual statement of financial information.
But the story fails to mention that on top of these pay hikes, mayor and council will receive cost of living adjustments annually for the next several years.

Of particular concern is the methodology used by the consultants in setting pay recommendations. In 2024, eight of the 13 comparators had greater populations,10 of the 13 had greater annual expenses.

So, these communities have budgets and populations in excess of Esquimalt which inflates the pay recommendations.

Its true council is following some of the Union of B.C. Municipalities best practices, although they effectively continue to ratchet up other municipal council salaries.

Esquimalt did not seek any feedback through a citizen committee or resident consultation. Setting aside self-interest for a moment, the validity of the pay recommendations are called into question when public input is not considered in the process.

Why does Esquimalt council bury information on remuneration and expenses on its website? How easy is it for the public to find clear, complete and consolidated information?

Ahead of the fall civic election, frustrated Esquimalt taxpayers will judge if these pay hikes are justified and if there’s sufficient transparency.

The pay hikes may be a hard sell following this year’s overall tax hike of 11.32 %, the highest surge in the entire region. It added an estimated $420 to the average tax bill in 2026.

Instead, the Province declined to authorize one.

In this interview, Trevor Barry, President of Amalgamation Yes, discusses:

• Why the Citizens’ Assembly reached such a strong recommendation
  • Why the Province’s response disappointed many residents
  • Why the upcoming non-binding referendum still matters
  • How one unified municipality could improve regional governance
  • Why voters should continue the conversation by voting YES this October

Whether you support amalgamation or not, this discussion is an important look at the future of local government in Greater Victoria.

After more than a decade of public consultation, petitions, municipal referendums, and a provincially funded Citizens’ Assembly, the Province of British Columbia rejected a request for a binding referendum on Victoria-Saanich amalgamation.

John Treleaven of the Grumpy Taxpayer$ and Colin Nielsen examine the history of amalgamation efforts, the Citizens’ Assembly recommendation, the Province’s response, ongoing Freedom of Information requests, and what these events may mean for local democracy and governance in Greater Victoria.

Topics include:

• The history of amalgamation efforts

• Citizens’ Assembly recommendations

• Provincial decision-making

• Freedom of Information requests

• Municipal governance

• Regional accountability

• The future of local government in Greater Victoria

How would you feel if your boss changed 16 times and the company name changed eight times during the last 25 years?

That’s the unfortunate reality at the municipal affairs department in this province. It’s a reality that does little to help local and regional governments faced with the immense challenges of aging infrastructure and escalating property taxes in Greater Victoria.

For decades, there’s been a revolving door of 16 ministers in this portfolio. Some stay a few months, some leave after a few years, and often inexperienced politicians are appointed as another minister in charge. But, for all intents and purposes, the minister is effectively in charge of the ‘junior’ ministry of municipal affairs.

The local government moniker has been renamed and shuffled around eight times during the last quarter century.

Historically the department has been combined or buried with other responsibilities for housing, community, rural development, sport, aboriginal, long term and home care, women’s services, or cultural development.

For many taxpayers and councils, the constant changes of ministers and regular name changes sends a clear message: local government is not important.

That’s curious when you consider the 53 cities, 48 district municipalities, 14 towns, 46 villages, and 27 regional districts were created by and are answerable to the province.

Does the government need to be reminded that this Ministry oversees vast, crucial responsibilities for taxpayers, such as community infrastructure, zoning, legislation, and local finance? It demands a steady and familiar hand, especially during these trying times.

So, perhaps if the government elevated and viewed municipal affairs as a senior-level, stand-alone portfolio it would go a long way to fulfilling provincial responsibilities.

For how much longer can our provincial leaders’ interest in local government only focus on party political considerations?

It’s very likely a shift from largely disregarding local government would result in improved governance and better value for our municipal tax dollar.

If you thought the residential property tax increase of 9.34% was startling this year, consider there may be hikes of more than 40% before the next elected council finishes their term.

It doesn’t take an accountant to predict that taxpayers are in for a few more body blows.

If initial estimates are any indication, the 2026-2030 Financial Plan for Victoria forecasts municipal tax increases of 13.43% in 2027, 9.77% in 2028, 8.68% in 2029, and 7.5% in 2030. What’s often overlooked is the compounding impact of those increases.

On top of that, residential homeowners will again see a percentage added annually to the tax increase as a result of shifts to reduce the amount business pays. Last year there was a shift of burden in the tax rate of 1.2% and 2.1% in 2026.

These are very preliminary city estimates. They are based on various assumptions such as assessments, inflation, revenue, cost projections and other factors.

Remember, these forecasts exclude other items that comprise your total tax notice. It’s unlikely those taxes collected on behalf of schools and levies collected for five other agencies will decrease.
A case in point, for some unexplained reason this scribe’s new ‘residential school tax’ increased year-over-year by 500%. And that’s not a typo.

There’s clearly resonance in Steve Orcherton’s rant “Truth, truthfulness and property tax notice shock” when he argues that Victoria homeowners deserve the full truth about soaring tax increases.
The new council will be faced with tough choices and require an entirely new and frugal approach to governing to retain quality critical services. The fractured governance model across the region we are forced to endure is unsustainable.

Maybe the only council candidates to elect are accountants who can read a financial statement and demand more fiscal discipline?

-30-

Long after this fall’s municipal election bike lanes will continue to be a passionately debated topic attracting varying and compelling opinions in the media on what seems like a daily basis.

It would be helpful if our municipal luminaries and leaders joined together to conduct a third-party review of the existing bike network across all jurisdictions.

Do we know if bike lanes meet their stated objectives? Is traffic congestion increasing and causing pollution issues? Going forward, are there maintenance and cost issues to resolve? How about a cost-benefit analysis? Can the network be better integrated?

The CRD and its newly created Regional Transportation Service is ideally positioned to reach across the municipal borders, conduct an analysis and work-up a broader perspective.

The service, designed to coordinate regional transportation, trails, and funding allows for an annual requisition of up to $20 million. Only a few hundred residents opposed the CRD funding request so there’s wide acceptance of the need to improve our transportation system.

The increased prevalence of e-bikes, e-mopeds and e-scooters, adds urgency to the task.

Good municipal governance demands that local authorities acknowledge the issues from the perspective of cyclists, pedestrians and drivers. For many supporters, the existing network has considerable merit, but think it’s ‘a good idea ridden too far’ especially in the downtown core area.

It’s believed an independent postmortem would mitigate issues, result in some tweaks and keep more residents in better humour.

Are there any aspiring local politicians that want to pick up the torch in time for GoByBike Week?