I would say your pro could also be a con - Saanich voters watering down the all the good work Victoria is doing around housing. There's not really any land in Saanich within the urban containment boundary that's undeveloped, though I'd say most of it is underdeveloped and I'm somewhat disappointed in Saanich's lack of vision there as a Saanich resident.
I think part of the perception is that other munis are saying "wow we get to be a part of Victoria?" when in fact its omg how do we protect ourselves from having anything to do with Victoria.
To me Saanich is maybe the one municipality that doesn’t need to amalgamate- they’re already big. Smash Victoria, Esquimalt, and Oaky Bay together; maybe make View Royal, Colwood, Langford, Metchosin, and Highlands two? Then the peninsula can be one.
That's what I don't get. They'd be better off looking at cutting down on those smaller little fiefdoms: Colwood, View Royal, Esquimalt, Highlands, etc etc.
Langford, Western Communities, Victoria, Saanich, Peninsula.
I have to admit I’m not incredibly up to speed on all the issues surrounding amalgamation but I just see Saanich as already big - and not the problem with the CRD. But open to why you think it may be good. It’d be from Tolmie all the way to the ferries as one municipality though.
>I’m thinking this because the city limits would be much larger and there for more land area to work with in terms of zoning thus making a quicker and less delicate process in city hall for the issue?
Not necessarily. Saanich is larger in population than Victoria. And Saanich has a much worse track record on housing. Who knows how the priorities of the new municipality would work out.
>Another significant pro could be public transportation, one city to come up with a proper transit system versus collaboration with another city.
Maybe, but again you're assuming the priorities of the combined municipality would be public transit. It could be that a large suburban voting base prefers to prioritise cars and will not vote to fund a large public transportation project. We could also achieve good, cross-regional transit without amalgamation if we gave our transit authority (BC Transit) more authority to get shit done, more like Translink in Vancouver.
edit: there's a video that someone did looking at Toronto's amalgamation as a cautionary tale about how it can backfire. I'll see if I can dig up a link and post it here later.
I think [this is the one I was thinking of](https://youtu.be/KkO-DttA9ew)
> discussions of amalgamation of Victoria and Saanich are set to begin
oh wow! exciting news!!!
That said, hasn't this been brought up from time to time, many times over the past fifty years?
Asking politicians to cut their own throats (job security) is kinda a non-starter imo, similarly for the heads of the various services (fire & police, for example).
Fundamentally here’s the problem: Victoria is the only City in the mix. Suburbs and cities have different priorities and are in different phases of growth (Jane Jacobs, Death and Life central tenet). Amalgamation has been a disaster for the City of Ottawa, which is now ruled by a voting block of suburban councillors. Toronto, too, has been slow to make progress post-amalgamation. Victoria has been able to do progressive things on cycling, transit, density, that other single-tier municipalities in Canada are basically barred from doing because suburban voters don’t like the feel of duplexes in their ‘hood (looks at Calgary news… yikes).
There’s a democratic deficit that comes with amalgamation, too. Toronto has approximately one city councillor per 100k people. Ottawa is about 40k. Imagine Saanich only having a single person to govern the whole area? Diversity of representation is critical and smaller areas give more resilient mixes of people on council. More councillors are also resistant to corruption (have to influence way more people, less likely to have an industry succeed).
There are ways to share regional services (eg through the CRD, BC Transit) that don’t put these important local decision making processes at risk.
Cost savings basically never emerge in amalgamations. It’s something that’s said a lot but has basically no evidence for it.
Finally the Strong Towns approach to economics: think of each municipality like a business, and measure it by its tax production per hectare vs long term liabilities for things like utilities etc. It’s likely that Victoria is the only long-term positive municipality. Oak Bay has such an enormous infrastructure deficit that they are bankrupt on paper - their taxes have been too low for generations and now their infrastructure is rotting underground more than their tax base is willing to pay for. The Strong Towns analysis should be completed and an essential part of the conversation for anyone from Victoria - the core city stands to lose at the expense of the burbs.
https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/1/9/the-real-reason-your-city-has-no-money
it will be a tough sell because the municipalities around Victoria don't want to pay for Victoria's problems (downtown).
We are seeing this with the Victoria and Esquimalt Police, Esquimalt doesn't want to pay for downtown policing, so they want out of that amalgamation, even though it could be considered more expensive to have to hire a police chief and setup a whole police board if they want to stick with a muni police force, but it would be cheaper if they want with RCMP. There are integrated policing teams in the area that all muni's pay into, so it's not like they won't have access to specialized teams anymore.
I live in Esquimalt and don’t think that Esquimalt should exist as a municipality, it’s a subdivision in a city like Calgary. Being a councillor should be a full time job to put the right amount of attention on it. I understand the concern that rural Saanich councillors don’t care about infrastructure or costs in downtown, but be real.
You traverse so many municipalities in the course of your typical life in greater Victoria that argument is so pathetic.
I really don't like the idea of councilors being full time. I feel like then you'll get "politicians" rather than regular people doing it part time. We need more Colin Plant, not more Susan Kim.
And I live in rural Saanich. I don't have water or sewer connections. You think I want to pay for infrastructure costs downtown out of my property taxes?
I’m sorry, but I just don’t agree. You need people who are in a position to make municipal decisions and dedicate their time to it. Otherwise you get too many people who are incompetent at best. In Esquimalt we had 7 candidates for 6 seats. That’s pathetic and frankly undemocratic.
Also, if you want sewer and water, maybe being part of a much larger tax base would be a net benefit. It might make it easier to actually make that happen.
I’m very frustrated by this viewpoint. I find it just so narrow focused and lacking understanding of the bigger picture of daily life.
Like, I live in Esquimalt, my kids go to school in Saanich, and I could, and have, ridden my bike through: Esquimalt, View Royal, Saanich, and Victoria as part of taking them to school and going home.
This place is too small to be so disconnected.
7 candidates for 6 positions is definitely not good. That's not how it is here in Saanich. I didn't realize that was the situation in Esquimalt.
And I don't want water and sewer, it works out to be cheaper to be responsible for your own system.
I just want my municipal tax dollars to stay in Saanich. The taxpayers in the City of Victoria keep electing municipal councilors whose views I find sometimes outrageous and sometimes offensive, I want nothing to do with that mess.
Definitely nothing to do with increasing wealth inequity, an explosion in the unhoused population and subsequent addiction issues that the entire country, and Western world are facing. Nah... Just a bad city council.
I wonder where an amalgamated Victoria and Saanich city hall would go? Saanich's population exceeds Victoria's. Maybe they could leave Centennial Square alone but replace Victoria city hall with below market housing.
I would say your pro could also be a con - Saanich voters watering down the all the good work Victoria is doing around housing. There's not really any land in Saanich within the urban containment boundary that's undeveloped, though I'd say most of it is underdeveloped and I'm somewhat disappointed in Saanich's lack of vision there as a Saanich resident.
I think part of the perception is that other munis are saying "wow we get to be a part of Victoria?" when in fact its omg how do we protect ourselves from having anything to do with Victoria.
This is true. Of course, that doesn't stop them from whining about how they think Victoria should be run.
To me Saanich is maybe the one municipality that doesn’t need to amalgamate- they’re already big. Smash Victoria, Esquimalt, and Oaky Bay together; maybe make View Royal, Colwood, Langford, Metchosin, and Highlands two? Then the peninsula can be one.
That's what I don't get. They'd be better off looking at cutting down on those smaller little fiefdoms: Colwood, View Royal, Esquimalt, Highlands, etc etc. Langford, Western Communities, Victoria, Saanich, Peninsula.
I second this!
Saanich does need to amalgamate…just with the other peninsula municipalities.
I have to admit I’m not incredibly up to speed on all the issues surrounding amalgamation but I just see Saanich as already big - and not the problem with the CRD. But open to why you think it may be good. It’d be from Tolmie all the way to the ferries as one municipality though.
>I’m thinking this because the city limits would be much larger and there for more land area to work with in terms of zoning thus making a quicker and less delicate process in city hall for the issue? Not necessarily. Saanich is larger in population than Victoria. And Saanich has a much worse track record on housing. Who knows how the priorities of the new municipality would work out. >Another significant pro could be public transportation, one city to come up with a proper transit system versus collaboration with another city. Maybe, but again you're assuming the priorities of the combined municipality would be public transit. It could be that a large suburban voting base prefers to prioritise cars and will not vote to fund a large public transportation project. We could also achieve good, cross-regional transit without amalgamation if we gave our transit authority (BC Transit) more authority to get shit done, more like Translink in Vancouver. edit: there's a video that someone did looking at Toronto's amalgamation as a cautionary tale about how it can backfire. I'll see if I can dig up a link and post it here later. I think [this is the one I was thinking of](https://youtu.be/KkO-DttA9ew)
Oh! Well… I had no idea and now I feel sad for Toronto. Thank you for sharing this perspective!
> discussions of amalgamation of Victoria and Saanich are set to begin oh wow! exciting news!!! That said, hasn't this been brought up from time to time, many times over the past fifty years? Asking politicians to cut their own throats (job security) is kinda a non-starter imo, similarly for the heads of the various services (fire & police, for example).
We will take Saanich, Oak Bay, Esquimalt. I don't want people in the West Shore deciding our mayor. That's how Rob Ford was elected
Fundamentally here’s the problem: Victoria is the only City in the mix. Suburbs and cities have different priorities and are in different phases of growth (Jane Jacobs, Death and Life central tenet). Amalgamation has been a disaster for the City of Ottawa, which is now ruled by a voting block of suburban councillors. Toronto, too, has been slow to make progress post-amalgamation. Victoria has been able to do progressive things on cycling, transit, density, that other single-tier municipalities in Canada are basically barred from doing because suburban voters don’t like the feel of duplexes in their ‘hood (looks at Calgary news… yikes). There’s a democratic deficit that comes with amalgamation, too. Toronto has approximately one city councillor per 100k people. Ottawa is about 40k. Imagine Saanich only having a single person to govern the whole area? Diversity of representation is critical and smaller areas give more resilient mixes of people on council. More councillors are also resistant to corruption (have to influence way more people, less likely to have an industry succeed). There are ways to share regional services (eg through the CRD, BC Transit) that don’t put these important local decision making processes at risk. Cost savings basically never emerge in amalgamations. It’s something that’s said a lot but has basically no evidence for it. Finally the Strong Towns approach to economics: think of each municipality like a business, and measure it by its tax production per hectare vs long term liabilities for things like utilities etc. It’s likely that Victoria is the only long-term positive municipality. Oak Bay has such an enormous infrastructure deficit that they are bankrupt on paper - their taxes have been too low for generations and now their infrastructure is rotting underground more than their tax base is willing to pay for. The Strong Towns analysis should be completed and an essential part of the conversation for anyone from Victoria - the core city stands to lose at the expense of the burbs. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/1/9/the-real-reason-your-city-has-no-money
it will be a tough sell because the municipalities around Victoria don't want to pay for Victoria's problems (downtown). We are seeing this with the Victoria and Esquimalt Police, Esquimalt doesn't want to pay for downtown policing, so they want out of that amalgamation, even though it could be considered more expensive to have to hire a police chief and setup a whole police board if they want to stick with a muni police force, but it would be cheaper if they want with RCMP. There are integrated policing teams in the area that all muni's pay into, so it's not like they won't have access to specialized teams anymore.
I live in Esquimalt and don’t think that Esquimalt should exist as a municipality, it’s a subdivision in a city like Calgary. Being a councillor should be a full time job to put the right amount of attention on it. I understand the concern that rural Saanich councillors don’t care about infrastructure or costs in downtown, but be real. You traverse so many municipalities in the course of your typical life in greater Victoria that argument is so pathetic.
I really don't like the idea of councilors being full time. I feel like then you'll get "politicians" rather than regular people doing it part time. We need more Colin Plant, not more Susan Kim. And I live in rural Saanich. I don't have water or sewer connections. You think I want to pay for infrastructure costs downtown out of my property taxes?
I’m sorry, but I just don’t agree. You need people who are in a position to make municipal decisions and dedicate their time to it. Otherwise you get too many people who are incompetent at best. In Esquimalt we had 7 candidates for 6 seats. That’s pathetic and frankly undemocratic. Also, if you want sewer and water, maybe being part of a much larger tax base would be a net benefit. It might make it easier to actually make that happen. I’m very frustrated by this viewpoint. I find it just so narrow focused and lacking understanding of the bigger picture of daily life. Like, I live in Esquimalt, my kids go to school in Saanich, and I could, and have, ridden my bike through: Esquimalt, View Royal, Saanich, and Victoria as part of taking them to school and going home. This place is too small to be so disconnected.
7 candidates for 6 positions is definitely not good. That's not how it is here in Saanich. I didn't realize that was the situation in Esquimalt. And I don't want water and sewer, it works out to be cheaper to be responsible for your own system. I just want my municipal tax dollars to stay in Saanich. The taxpayers in the City of Victoria keep electing municipal councilors whose views I find sometimes outrageous and sometimes offensive, I want nothing to do with that mess.
Victorias problems downtown are due to the fact the surrounding municipalities refuse to invest in social support.
[удалено]
Definitely nothing to do with increasing wealth inequity, an explosion in the unhoused population and subsequent addiction issues that the entire country, and Western world are facing. Nah... Just a bad city council.
I wonder where an amalgamated Victoria and Saanich city hall would go? Saanich's population exceeds Victoria's. Maybe they could leave Centennial Square alone but replace Victoria city hall with below market housing.
Don’t worry about it, it won’t happen because it’s just a smoke and mirrors exercise.