Skip to content

Saltair powerless to defend itself from region-wide cash grab

Usage to funding formula extremely disproportionate
11661223_web1_letters-logo

I am shocked and disappointed to discover Cowichan Valley Regional District staff recommending Regional Recreation Funding Option F for a region-wide referendum. Option F does not feel like a responsible exercise of power. It feels like an abuse of power, a set-up and a cash grab.

If Option F is put to a region-wide vote, 51,715 persons in Duncan, North Cowichan, Ladysmith and Shawnigan Lake will have a financial interest in voting for the bylaw. These are the winners who might offload some of their facility expenses on other participating areas.

Only 25,113 persons in Lake Cowichan, Mill Bay/Malahat, Cobble Hill, Cowichan Bay, Cowichan Koksilah, Saltair/Gulf Islands and North Oyster/Diamond will have a financial interest in seeing the option defeated. These are the losers, the CVRD taxpayers who will have their pockets picked. They have no real opportunity to defeat such a bylaw.

The fact directors from municipalities can gang up on our director to force a region-wide vote on a bylaw, which would simply move funds, is unacceptable. It is particularly unacceptable because there is no new service involved.

Option F is an example of how Section 342 (4) of the Local Government Act can be abused to tax a participating area without providing a service. Using a region-wide referendum in this manner is, at least, inconsistent with the spirit of the Act. I hope the inspector will not approve such an amending bylaw and failing this, that our director will appeal under Section 347 (4) and then that the minister will implement 347 (a) or (b). My ultimate wish is that our provincial government will amend the Act to prevent this from ever happening again.

The facts are: (1) North Cowichan built an arena complex without any input from Saltair taxpayers, (2) Ladysmith built a pool complex without any input from Saltair taxpayers, and (3) North Cowichan and Ladysmith are now attempting to offload a disproportionate and unjustified amount of the costs resulting from these decisions on Saltair.

I say “disproportionate” because there is no relationship between FJCC pool usage by Saltairians and FLA usage by Saltairians and the Option F proposal. Why should we pay 24.4 per cent of the pool funding and 9.2 per cent of the arena funding when we account for less than the six per cent of the pool usage and 3.9 per cent of the arena usage? It is what it looks like, a cash grab from a small electoral area that is obviously powerless to defend itself in the face of a region-wide vote.

I say “unjustified” because there is no justification for a proximity charge in the April 10, 2018 Phase Three Report. This is worth emphasizing. If Option F passes, Saltair’s tax contribution to these two facilities will increase from $40,000 ($6.68 per $100K of property value) to $454,000 ($75.81 per $100K of property value).

One would expect to see some justification for this 1,135 per cent increase in the report. The fact it isn’t there speaks volumes about the integrity of the report. Similarly, the fact the report calls the existing funding unfair, again without any explanation, is equally mysterious. It is apparent the primary responsibility for funding any facility rests with its owner or operator. People just don’t normally get to dip their hands in their neighbours’ pockets when their decisions go badly.

Whether or not Option F fails, the idea taxpayers who support a facility should pay the same amount for using a facility as those who do not, is also unfair. Two-tiered fees are really the only fair way to adjust for taxpayer support. Having said this, I understand Saltair has agreed to contribute to both facilities based on usage. Although this isn’t entirely fair, it at least gives the appearance of being somewhat fair. I urge you to accept this result.

Gord Van Dyck

Saltair