The 2018 municipal election is behind us, but thousands of permanent residents in Greater Victoria are left wondering why they were unable to vote.

According to Fresh Voices, an advocacy group for immigrants and refugees, there are 60,000 permanent residents in Vancouver alone that were unable to vote. In the 2016 Census, Stats Canada reported almost 16,000 immigrants of varying ages living just in the Victoria Census Metropolitan Area of 81,655.  

“Permanent residents are engaged,” says Whitey Mitchell, a board member with Grumpy Taxpayer$ and a permanent resident. We take an interest in what is going on and we have input to give as well as a diversity of experiences to offer. I chose to live here and make my life here and want to make this place even better for myself, my friends, and my children.”

Permanent residents have the right to get most social benefits that Canadian citizens receive, including health care coverage, to live, work or study anywhere in Canada, and receive protection under Canadian law and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. They must pay taxes – all municipal taxes including school, plus income tax – and respect all Canadian laws at the federal, provincial and municipal levels.

But until permanent residents apply for Canadian citizenship and get it – they can’t vote in any election.

Last spring the City of Vancouver council unanimously voted to extend municipal voting rights to permanent residents and is urging the province to change the laws. At the time the Vancouver Sun sounded a note of caution, describing council’s actions as a “feel-good initiative”  and for the province to consider carefully “the serious implications” of any change.

According to Fresh Voices, more than 45 countries including Australia, Denmark, New Zealand and seven jurisdictions in the U.S. allow permanent residents to vote in municipal elections. Eleven jurisdictions in Canada are looking at the change. 

READ MORE:

Permanent residents can’t vote in municipal elections: This group wants to change that, Global News, Nov. 9, 2018.

Take time to consider extending the right to vote,Vancouver Sun Editorial, Apr. 20, 2018.  

Immigrants in Victoria, The Canadian Magazine of Immigration, June, 2016.  

Census Profile of Victoria CMA 2016, Stats Canada

Series prompts action by Saanich 
1st Annual Media Award winner highlights non-profit and church tax exemptions

Journalist Wolf Depner of Saanich News is the winner of the 1st Annual Media Award from Grumpy Taxpayer$ of Greater Victoria for his stories that resulted in the municipality reviewing its permissive tax exemptions.

Non-profit organizations including religious institutions in Saanich may have to justify their permissive tax exemptions in the future as a result of the  series.

“We believe it’s very important to recognize exemplary media coverage focusing on local government,” says Stan Bartlett, chair of Grumpy Taxpayer$ of Greater Victoria.

“Talking or writing about taxes, religion and politics in public is difficult but Mr. Depner managed to accomplish that in an informed, balanced fashion.”

His three-part series ran in September: Humanist group says Saanich taxes public purse with tax exemptions, Religious institutions in Saanich may have to justify their permissive tax exemptions, and Vancouver Islanders ponder the traditional practice of giving tax breaks to churches.

“The success of Grumpy Taxpayer$ is partly due to the media – particularly Saanich News – taking an interest in local government and recognizing its major impact on their reader’s lives.”

“In recent years, access to quality news is under threat: Media coverage of local government has been diminishing, an issue attributed to the advent of the Internet some 20 years ago, the economic downturn a decade ago, and most recently, the election of an autocratic, anti-media president in the White House,” says Bartlett.

READ MORE:

Grumpy Taxpayer$ offer Saanich News reporter inaugural media award, Nov. 13, 2018.

New report finds newspaper cuts bad news for local political coverage, JSource, The Canadian Journalism Project, Sept. 26, 2018.

Newspapers matter, more now than ever, Publisher Bob Cox, Winnipeg Free Press.

BY BRUCE AND LAURIE KENNEDY

When newly-minted Mayor Fred Haynes and council sit down to plan priorities for the next four years, they must focus more on renewing the aging infrastructure in Saanich and less on election wish lists.

Saanich faces mounting budget pressures from several sources. Some are from unanticipated costs including the Employers’ Health Tax and cleaning up Regina Park after tent city, others from expected cost increases such as union contracts.

Meanwhile, the discussion around Saanich’s infrastructure deficit has faded into the background. So it’s critical to bring this discussion back into the forefront.

The infrastructure deficit is the difference between the cost of replacement of an asset, such as a building or a water pipe, which has reached the end of its useful life and the amount of money currently available to replace it. This should be the major issue for Saanich’s newly elected council: It seems that several of the younger members understand this, as they have expressed a concern about leaving a big tax bill for future generations.

Saanich has the region’s largest municipal population, with about 115,000 residents, and has an extensive, aging infrastructure.  For example, parts of the municipality are still serviced by wooden stave water pipes.

How much money does Saanich need to keep it all in good operating condition?  We asked the director of finance in 2018 and she responded, “Implementation of a full asset management program that would eventually lead us to reliable replacement and deficit calculations for all assets is some way off.”  We don’t hold Saanich staff responsible for not having an answer, but rather we saw this as a failure of the previous council to understand how crippling this deficit may be.

In the absence of a concrete deficit figure from Saanich, we turned to the Canadian Infrastructure Report (2016). This report is designed to assess the condition of municipally owned infrastructure across Canada.  This report puts the dollar replacement value of assets in poor and very poor condition at $10,000 a household (Page 12). In Saanich there are 49,422 private households according to the 2016 census.  So that gives a rough estimate of almost $500 million for its infrastructure deficit.   

As early as 2015 council and Saanich’s administration identified the poor condition of the district’s infrastructure – everything from streets, sewer and water pipes, buildings,  and information technology – as a priority. Since then, .75 per cent of each annual budget was set aside toward infrastructure replacement. The critical question becomes, is it enough in this age of escalating construction costs and rising interest rates?

This spring Saanich council approved a strategic facilities master plan that recommended to first redevelop the aging parks and public works yard and Fire Hall No. 2, which are considered the most critical.

The master plan prioritized 10 major municipal buildings that need redevelopment or replacement, but provided no cost estimates of timelines.  In the meantime, we are paying escalating maintenance costs on these aging infrastructures, funds that we will never recover.

So what are council’s options in dealing with this?

Saanich has the ability to borrow money. Saanich’s policy has wisely allowed for a maximum of $92 million of debt, and there’s currently only $46 million, according to the master plan. Using everything, we might be able to replace the public works yard and the fire hall, but what about everything else on the long list? Is this a good option as interest rates are rising (five times since July 2017 and more increases predicted in the next year)?

What about raising taxes?  Well, that would directly impact the issue of affordable housing with these costs being borne by renters and homeowners.  Council could put the burden on business owners, but that would negatively impact economic development.

The simple answer is that this new council needs to  prioritize its capital projects based on what must be done, versus, the nice to dos.  Any plans brought before council need to not simply be a vision, but also detail the costs.  Council also needs to insist that staff look for economy in their designs and avoid building monuments and adding unnecessary frills.

It will be up to mayor and council to decide; do we want new hockey arenas or a functional fire hall. We probably can’t afford both.

The Kennedy’s are Saanich residents and board members of the advocacy group Grumpy Taxpayer$ of Greater Victoria.

RELATED

The harsh reality of Saanich’s crumbling infrastructure, Times Colonist, Nov. 4, 2018

https://www.timescolonist.com/opinion/op-ed/island-voices-the-harsh-reality-of-saanich-s-crumbling-infrastructure-1.23485327

Strategic Facilities Master Plan, Administration Report, Apr. 12, 2018


http://saanich.ca.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=151&meta_id=6404

District of Saanich Strategic Facilities Master Plan, 2018

http://saanich.ca.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=151&meta_id=6405

Saanich Draft Financial Plan, 2018-22

http://www.saanich.ca/assets/Local%7EGovernment/Documents/2018%20Financial%20Plan%20Draft.pdf

Canadian Infrastructure Report Card (2016)

In our view, the money government spends is ours and those in temporary charge of our municipality are our employees. It follows that it’s the responsibility of councils and municipalities to tell us clearly how much of our money they are spending and on what.

In an era of poor voter turnout and weak political engagement at a local level, anything a municipality can do to soothe cranky taxpayers and help improve transparency, is a good thing. We urge the new councils to adopt these six best practices:

• It’s called the ‘dashboard’ and it greatly simplifies finding out how your councillor or CRD director voted on every motion that’s brought forward and decision made. In April 2016 Vancouver City Council instituted a Council Voting Dashboard, so that interested parties can examine the voting record on each item (either in favor, opposed, abstained, absent or in conflict of interest). It also lets voters know if the councillor showed up for the vote.

Of course, meeting minutes and, in most cases, video archives, also show how councillors vote. The problem is that reading through minutes of multiple meetings or watching multiple archived council meetings is extremely time consuming for people.

The task of updating this record is performed by municipal legislative services, so it’s easy to maintain once set up and it could be done by the same person who records the minutes. The City of Victoria has recently approved implementing this valuable tool likely next year.

• Most taxpayers are unaware that annual financial disclosure statements are submitted each year in mid January by the incumbent mayor and councillors (as well as municipal nominees and employees) pursuant to the BC Financial Disclosure Act.

The legislation requires that politicians list income, real property, liabilities, corporate assets and investments with the aim of preventing conflicts of interest.

The City of Vancouver is one of the few jurisdictions that provides the public with yearly links to the financial disclosure statements on its municipal website.

In the interests of transparency, Grumpy Taxpayer$ urges municipalities, electoral districts and the CRD to follow suit and provide easy access by posting disclosure statements annually for the convenience of the public.

• Politicians have a tendency to close doors and go in-camera too often, with the result that the public never knows what happened.

The City of Vancouver makes a practice of posting in-camera decisions and reports on a regular basis.They’re released because they are no longer considered sensitive, but this practice is not necessarily followed by every municipality.

• By law, municipalities are required to compile a Statement of Financial Information (SOFI) annually that includes council remuneration and expenses.

But in North Vancouver, mayors and councillors expenses are posted quarterly instead of many months after the fact. That practice is far more timely for the inquiring mind.

• Council agendas can run up to an astounding 2,000 pages. The taxpayer doesn’t have time or patience to wade through to find items of interest.

The City of Victoria sends out a public brief ‘Council highlights report’ that outlines important items with convenient links to further information. Why in heck aren’t other jurisdictions – particularly the larger one’s – adopting this low-cost practice?

• The annual report, financial statement and annual budget are the three critical documents to learn what your council is doing with your tax dollars.

In our view, annual reports shouldn’t be full of public relations fluff, but provide important and understandable information about what’s going on. Complicated and highly detailed financial statements should be presented of course, but in there also needs to be a brief, understandable version. Budgets should also be presented in a summation format so as to be more understandable.

Links for all of these key documents should be prominently and permanently displayed on a local government website homepage, not buried.

In sum, better transparency in municipal affairs leads to more and better quality information for the public, along with increased involvement and scrutiny.

It will also result in increased respect for the political process and better value for our tax dollars.

Arguably an institution whose identity can’t be clearly defined is set up for failure and can’t be held accountable for anything.

It’s there at the bottom left-hand corner of the homepage of the Capital Regional District website – ‘The CRD is a local government.’ Furthermore, the Times Colonist reckoned in a recent editorial that it’s, “The government that Greater Victorians love to hate…”

Depending on the label you attach to the CRD, it has huge consequences for your escalating tax load: If the status of a public agency is unclear to voters and staff then accountability becomes complicated, if not impossible. In an accountability model based on lack of power to directly raise taxes, accountability is even more of an issue. To spend, but not be able to raise and account for the revenue, most residents agree results in a dysfunctional, undemocratic and costly local administration.

To help sort out the identity crisis we spoke with the CRD itself, consulted the most respected dictionary in the Western World (Oxford Dictionary), the recent provincial report Capital Integrated Services and Governance Initiative (CISGI), and the Community Charter and Local Government Act (the underlying legislation).

Andy Orr, the communications manager at the CRD “agrees the term (regional government) is open to interpretation but says it’s the right term.”

“We do go out of our way to use the ‘federation’ language and to be clear that many of our services are opt in, but even in that case they are generally supplied across the region,” says Orr.

Not so, if you look at the 16 services offered by the CRD as detailed in the CISGI report. Take policing for example, participation in shared services varies from 30 per cent in Langford to 93 per cent in Saanich. For recreation services, shared services range from 45 per cent in Sooke to 91 per cent in Victoria.

Orr says, “The ‘regional government’ is also an important term in getting grant money and responsibilities from senior level of governments, like being the entity for the federal housing strategy monies that flow to our region. I think we clearly have regional parks and regional water supply delivery and a regional watershed supply area.”

That’s confusing because the CISGI report is categorical in referring to regional districts as “federations of municipal and rural participants”, adding, ”Regional districts are created by the provincial government to provide a basis for inter-municipal collaboration, as well as to provide local government services to areas outside of municipalities (e.g. unincorporated areas or ‘electoral areas’).”

It goes on, “Regional Districts are designed to be a basis for partnership between their constituent units and not a second tier of local government or a fourth level of government. They are designed to enable participants to combine to provide services they cannot provide themselves.”

Mind you, the province and the federal governments often treat the CRD as a level of government. There are regional functions required by legislation and some services provided across the region such as a developing a growth strategy (or not) and the landfill function.

So, time to turn to the esteemed Oxford dictionary, which defines government as, “the group of people with the authority to govern a country or state; a particular ministry in office.’

The CRD has some authority – but not a lot. It can’t raise taxes like other governments (municipalities contribute funds depending on which services they opt-in for). It doesn’t get involved in various activities such as roads (like the province and the feds). Its 24-person board isn’t directly elected or accountable to the public and tends to at in secrecy. It has failed miserably at the larger issues such as developing a sewer treatment plan, a regional growth strategy or a regional transportation plan.

When you look at the underlying legislation for the CRD, the Local Government Act and Community Charter, describe regional districts ambiguously as, “an independent, responsible and accountable ‘order’ of government within their jurisdiction.” It’s certainly debatable about how responsible and accountable the CRD is, and this writer has no idea what is meant by ‘order.’

So maybe the CRD – no other jurisdiction in the world has seen fit to replicate the regional district model since inception 50 years ago – is a federation?

It’s true that the Oxford definition of federation as “an organization or group within which smaller divisions have some degree of internal autonomy” and that the word fits the CRD to some extent. It’s true the word ‘federation’ is also a lot more upscale and reflective of its huge budget than calling the CRD an ‘administrative unit.’

The word federation is also less misleading and more accurate for taxpayers in 13 municipalities and three electoral areas who foot the bill for 571 full-time and 500 part-time staff.

This weak partnership with its limitations on pragmatism, compromise and common sense continues to suit the provincial government, which is very wary of having any powerful mega jurisdiction challenge it across the boardroom table.

Given its strong resistance to making substantive improvements, the public can only conclude that the province prefers to maintain this ineffective and squabbling federation.

Let’s go with federation.

Bartlett is the chair of Grumpy Taxpayer$ of Greater Victoria, a non-partisan advocacy group dedicated to lower taxes, less waste, and more accountable municipal government.

RELATED

Capital Integrated Services and Governance Initiative (CISGI), Section 2.2.1, BC Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development, 2016. https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2017MAH0002-001472

BC Community Charter, 2016.
http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/consol15/consol15/03026_00

Local Government Act, 2017, Part 5.
http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/r15001_00

Grumpy Taxpayer$ is a non-profit, unaffiliated, non-partisan, citizen’s advocacy group dedicated to lower taxes, less waste, and more accountable municipal government. DONATE & JOIN US?

Taxpayers feeling pick-pocketed by their municipalities aren’t likely to get quick relief or better services, now that the province released its study on integrating services and governance.

Grumpy Taxpayer$ is a non-profit, unaffiliated, non-partisan, citizen’s advocacy group dedicated to lower taxes, less waste, and more accountable municipal government. DONATE & JOIN US?

1. Our approach works. We lead the opposition against the 2022 Commonwealth Games bid, what would have been an expensive $1.5 billion boondoggle. We continue to scrutinize municipal budgets, major capital projects, and the dysfunctional, undemocratic governance model of the CRD. Our approach works.

2. We are one of a kind. No other organization in Greater Victoria works toward holding municipal politicians and municipalities accountable. Our volunteer citizen’s advocacy group works toward better value for municipal taxes.

3. We are not opposed to taxes. Taxes are the price for society, but how much tax is too much? We are dedicated to lower taxes, less waste, and more accountable municipal government.

4. We are legitimate. Our organization is registered as a non-profit under BC Societies Act and must file annual reports, bylaws, board of directors’ lists, and financial statements.

5. We get our message out. Our newsletter reaches about 2,500 people monthly through subscribers, our website grumpytaxpayers.com, Twitter and Facebook.

6. We are known to the media. Our viewpoints are printed by the Times-Colonist, Vancouver Sun, and Black News publications. We are a regular contributor to CFAX 1070, and appear on CBC, Global and CTV News.

7. We are positive and an open organization. While we’ve been known to get grumpy, it’s our goal to ask questions and be positive in our efforts. All board meetings are open to members and guests. We welcome your input and comments to our approaches and policies.

8. We are pro business and economic development. It’s recognized business activity generates all taxes and contributes in the betterment of our lives and community.

9. We are unaffiliated. While there are kindred spirits out there, we’re not affiliated with or part of any other organization so function independently.

10. We are non-partisan. While we are ‘political’ in our efforts, we support no political party or candidate.

We depend on your financial support. Donate $25, $100, $500, whatever you feel comfortable with. Some members choose to make additional donations annually. Remember, it’s a lifetime donation and membership until you unfriend us.

DONATE & JOIN US by sending your cheque to Grumpy Taxpayer$ of Greater Victoria, #1606-751 Fairfield Rd., Victoria, BC V8W4A4. Or, click PayPal in the top right corner of grumpytaxpayers.com.

There were fewer than 60,000 residents in either Victoria or Saanich, and only a few thousand people in Sidney. Langford, Colwood and View Royal were only a twinkle in someone’s eye.

The same year British Columbia also ‘boldly went where no one had gone before’ and corralled a ragtag group of villages, towns, cities, and the spaces in between, into one administrative unit. The primary legislation governing regional districts eventually became the Local Government Act, although certain aspects of the Community Charter of 2003 also apply.

Unfortunately, during the last few generations the public has accumulated a widely held but false set of beliefs or myths about the Capital Regional District (CRD) which we hope to dispel.

1. CRD is a level of government. A common misconception, but the CRD is not a government. It’s an administrative unit and a forum where a board of 24 meets to deal with regional issues and needs. It does not have the power to implement decisions when opposed by local authorities.

2. CRD is a democratic institution. The CRD chair and all but three members of the board are not directly elected by popular vote or directly accountable for decisions and actions. So, 21 directors are selected or appointed by the various municipalities, bolstered by another 24 alternate directors who are also unelected. The board oath of allegiance does not require directors to act in the interests of the region.

3. CRD has taxing authority. It has no powers of taxation in its enabling legislation and can’t directly impose and collect taxes. It receives most of its revenue from an agglomeration of 13 municipalities and their taxpayers through annual assessments.

4. CRD directors represents an equal amount of population. Not at all. Municipalities are allocated one director for each 25,000 in population or portion thereof. Policy decisions are made by the board some of which affect the entire CRD. Population per director ranges from 2,221 per Highlands director to 22,153 per Saanich director. Then there’s ‘weighted votes’ made on funding decisions that vary from a population of 2,221 for the Highlands to 5,780 for Langford.

5. CRD is well run and efficient. After an epic and rancorous debate over regional sewer treatment that eventually required the province to step in – and $65-million wasted before agreement – the ineffectual CRD became a major issue for taxpayers. From animal control to parks to transportation, many of the roles and responsibilities of the CRD overlap with its constituent municipalities.

6. CRD is a transparent organization. The most striking thing about the CRD is its complexity: It’s not uncommon to have 1,000-page agendas or budget documents. There are 25 standing committees and select committees, along with a total of 53 committees, boards and commissions, topped up with appointments to 16 external boards. There are 155 inter-municipal arrangements, agreements between one or more municipalities administered by the CRD. Each of these separate functions requires its own legal agreement, financial formulas, management committee and CRD staff to administer. (There’s also 201 so-called ‘good neighbour’ agreements, separate voluntary integrated service delivery (ISD) arrangements organized among municipalities, separate from those administered by the CRD).

7. CRD services are paid for by everyone. True, every taxpayer in the South Island contributes to the operation of the CRD administrative operations. But, each municipality is also assessed a different amount depending on which of the 210 local, regional or sub-regional services they receive.

8. CRD is a low-budget operation. The CRD consolidated operations and capital budget this year totals almost $500-million, the largest budget in the region including Victoria or Saanich. The CRD has grown dramatically from six to 13 municipalities – Saltspring will hold a referendum in September to decide on forming a municipality – and three electoral districts across the South Island from Port Renfrew to the Gulf Islands.

9. CRD focuses on sewage treatment, water conservation, and managing parks. The CRD’s mandate has mushroomed to include 210 services, along with responsibility for the Capital Regional Hospital District and the Capital Regional Housing Corp. A recent addition was taking on duties for emergency management in the region for disasters like earthquakes.

10. CRD employs a couple of hundred people. It has morphed into a large bureaucracy especially during the last few decades. Now the staff complement totals more than 1,000, with 530 regular staff, 41 term positions, and 441 seasonal and casual staff housed around the district.

These myths aren’t only carried around by the bewildered public, but also by some elected officials and their staff. At the end of the day, the taxpayer has a CRD that’s undemocratic, dysfunctional and unaffordable, a situation that cannot continue for the taxpayer.

Better and more responsive local governance would help grow a $15-billion regional economy.

During the summer of 2016 the province struck the Capital Integration Services and Governance Initiative (CISGI) to review the governance and operation of the CRD. The public and local politicians eagerly await its recommendations and for the province to assume some leadership in shaping local government.

Since the regional district blueprint was introduced a half century ago there’s no other jurisdiction in North America – maybe the world – that has copied this alien approach to managing municipal affairs.
Reprint this Opinion Column with credit to Grumpy Taxpayer$ of Greater Victoria please.