Development Cost Charges - Development Cost Charges (DCCs) and Amenity Cost Charges (ACCs) are essential financial tools for funding infrastructure and community amenities necessitated by new developments. These charges ensure that the costs associated with growth are equitably shared between developers and the broader community.
Previously, when Esquimalt was not recognized as a desirable location for development, these charges would have worked against development. Now, these charges would work to moderate growth and provide much-needed funding. Times have changed, and Esquimalt is now a desirable development location. With the increased flexibility provided by the province, these funds are substantially more fluid in how they can be used. A significant amount of possible funding has already been lost due to the refusal to implement these fees.
Two possible arguments against these charges are as follows: Increased development costs and barriers to entry for small developers. The idea that people are paying less for new developments in Esquimalt versus other municipalities that have these fees is an absolute fallacy. It is not increased development costs – it is increased developer profits. The cost to the consumer remains the same. As far as a barrier to small-scale developers, we can outline how these charges are levied, so this can very easily be dealt with at the implementation stage.

Affordable Housing - There is no argument from me that this is a top priority. Having affordable housing options benefits the community in numerous ways including maintaining the vibrant community that Esquimalt prides itself on.

The first thing that I believe has to happen is that it has to become a priority. For some reason, I have watched this issue be put on the back burner as not possible or outside of the possibility for the Mayor and Council to address. I don’t believe that to be true. We have to advocate for solutions to be found to support those in our community who are put at risk due to unaffordability. We can find creative solutions, but we must put our heads together and address this as an important issue that underpins the very foundation of maintaining the Esquimalt that we know and love. So many in our community are consistently put at risk and the discussion around how we find solutions needs to be prioritized.

​

Some things I believe should be prioritized are as follows:

1. Regional and Organizational Partnerships are a MUST

2. Implementation of Development Cost Charges (DCCs) and utilization of Community Amenity Contributions (I am still on the hunt to find when this has ever been used in Esquimalt)

3. Inclusionary Housing Policies - This includes working with developers and other stakeholders to find the right approach and balance.

​

Ultimately, the biggest block to affordable housing in Esquimalt is that nobody is DOING anything to include it as a priority. There are funds set aside to look into this, but this has been a long-ignored issue; meanwhile,  the affordability crisis is not new.

 

Policing - To navigate the complexities of policing structures, whether they be amalgamation or localised services, it is essential to maintain a balanced, open-minded approach. Historical research provides a valuable foundation, but evolving community needs must be considered in any decision-making process. A hybrid model that blends local community policing with the resources of a larger organization appears promising, but careful attention must be paid to concerns about the loss of local control. Arguably the research points to the current hybrid model that we have as a very good model. This seems reasonable to me, but the issue is the current Framework Agreement that sees Esquimalt as the only municipality contributing to the large costs of downtown policing. The question then becomes, is it the model that requires changing, or is it the Agreement under which the model operates? I would argue the latter.

Ongoing research, data-driven decisions, and the inclusion of all voices in the conversation are crucial for ensuring that any changes to policing structures address both the benefits and challenges. By fostering an open dialogue and ensuring municipal and provincial representatives have a solid understanding of the funding models and policing models, I hope that we can work toward a more cost-effective policing system for Esquimalt that serves the best interests of all municipalities.

OCP Update - The world has changed, and as a result, Esquimalt has changed. The OCP (Official Community Plan) is in dire need of an update. This is an opportunity for you, the constituent, to provide input on the direction of Esquimalt.

The OCP update should be facilitated by discussions that incorporate education seminars so that the information gathered is useful for Mayor and Council as they develop their priorities. As a long time employee in municipal government, I have watched a lot of money wasted on community consultative processes because the community doesn’t have a fulsome understanding of the powers of municipal representatives and they can’t understand the actual costs of things because the costs are so massive and out of their normal understanding of expenditures. It is the responsibility of your local government to educate you so that you can formulate your decisions based on facts.

Don’t misunderstand me – I want an outdoor pool, pickleball courts, a go-kart track, a petting zoo, and community BBQ spaces with personal BBQ chefs preparing my steak to perfection as much as the next guy. But when I tell you the actual cost of these things and what would be de-prioritized, you could make a very informed decision. The costs seem unreasonable, but those are the costs. With a more involved and educationally focused OCP process, you could make a more informed decision about how you want your tax dollars spent.

Infrastructure Renewal - I should point out that currently, the Mayor and Council are responsible for the following:

​

1. Adopting the Asset Management Policy and other future updates.

2. Allocation of financial resources.

3. Providing high-level oversight of the delivery of the Township’s Asset Management strategy.

​

There are things other than the adoption of policy and the budgetary process that can be done to promote responsible management of our current infrastructure deficit. The two big things are to implement Development Cost Charges and to manage the budget in a fiscally responsible manner that does not require any further borrowing.

Staff has done a good job of presenting the Mayor and Council with the current situation and has made reasonable recommendations. They have done significant asset management planning, allowing municipalities to prioritize infrastructure needs based on condition assessments and assessing the most fiscally responsible way to ensure we have the money to spend on maintenance and renewal. This approach ensures that our limited resources are allocated efficiently, focusing on the most pressing maintenance and renewal projects. So, I think that a primary responsibility, should I be elected, would be to listen to the staff that is in place doing the boots on the ground work and ask questions to determine what is needed. This is not to say that blindly following recommendations is the way forward in every case as asking the right questions is always helpful in prioritizing; but, in this case, I believe that staff are aware of what is needed from a budgetary response, and I believe not funding the most recent request in full was an error. During the budget process, several times it was pointed out that coordinating infrastructure projects would lead to cost savings and minimizing service disruptions and these recommendations should be thoroughly considered. Arguably, any municipal councilor has to admit when they are outside their scope of expertise and rely on the staff in place to present the most fiscally responsible options. I have a limited full understanding of the processes and costs of infrastructure renewal. I would argue that this is an area that most in the Councilor role are at a deficit – therefore, we must trust municipal staff to present the best options. Then we need to support them to implement those plans, pending those plans being totally bonkers which is not the case currently. The counsellor's role is to be able to identify plans that ARE bonkers, not to refuse funding to those that aren't.

I believe that options exist for leveraging provincial and federal funding. This may or may not be true, but it is worth investigating. In addition, clear and transparent budgetary processes would assist the public in understanding how funds are allocated. Our current process is arguably not easy for a member of the public to understand without substantial knowledge of both infrastructure renewal AND budgetary processes. WE have to make this easier to understand.

Infrastructure plans should be continuously updated with a long-term plan. Again, this work has been done by staff, and it has been recognized that Esquimalt is a bit behind the 8 ball on this. This is something that needs to be depoliticized as a possible cut to decrease property taxes. We absolutely must fund these infrastructure renewal projects. The longer we wait, the more it will cost. I strongly believe that developing a long-term plan is a great idea, but an extended phased approach to infrastructure renewal is not the way to go and will end up costing the taxpayer more in the long run.

Alternative Approval Process - Esquimalt is where it is financially due to the use of the Alternative Approval Process (AAP). Yes, it is a tool used by municipalities to seek public approval for borrowing or other decisions without the need for a referendum, and some argue that it offers an efficient and cost-effective method for decision-making. I am fundamentally opposed to this method for the following reasons:

​

1. Lack of Direct Democracy: It does not allow for a full, direct vote by the public. Instead, it requires residents to actively oppose a proposal by submitting a petition. This is less democratic, as it places the burden on citizens to protest, rather than on community leadership to gather support.

2. Low Public Engagement: The AAP process did not reach all residents effectively, leading to low participation rates. You inadvertently agreed to the new public safety building and the costs associated with it without even knowing you did it. Many likely weren’t even aware of the opportunity to oppose the proposal. This decision was made without broad public input and has had a very significant effect on your municipality and your taxation.

3. Limited Transparency: The AAP does not provide enough opportunity for meaningful debate or discussion about the issue at hand. Without a public vote, important decisions regarding significant borrowing or spending were made with limited public scrutiny.

4. Potential for Disproportionate Influence: Since the AAP process is based on the submission of petitions, it can be influenced by a small, vocal minority. This means that the perspectives of those who are engaged or opposed to the decision may carry more weight than the general population, leading to outcomes that may not reflect the will of the broader community.

5. Complexity of Participation: The process was complicated and burdensome for ordinary citizens. Submitting a petition or actively opposing a decision may not be something that you are comfortable with or knowledgeable about. This reduces participation and limits your voice.

6. Potential for Undue Pressure: The AAP that was used in Esquimalt to make a major financial decision was done so without giving residents enough time or resources to understand the ramifications. Without a public referendum, the public did not fully grasp the financial implications of what they weren’t opposing. The debt financing is significant and will impact Esquimalt for many years to come.

While the AAP is a legitimate tool under provincial law, it is important that careful consideration and transparency are of the utmost importance when using it for decisions that significantly impact a municipality's finances and services. I do not believe that this was the case in the recent use of this tool. I will never support this.

​

Maintaining Business - First, let's address what we are doing well...we have a community that supports its local businesses wholeheartedly. This community support and the treatment of staff assist businesses in retaining the workers they do have. You, as community members, have yourselves to thank for that. Transit into Esquimalt is reasonable – it could be better, but it remains a location that is accessible by transit. We also have a diverse community, and that lends itself to accessibility to staff.

Now, to address the elephant in the room. Affordability. That is what this question comes down to. How can we attract people to come and live in our amazing community? This changes the question slightly to a mix of affordable housing options and business growth. These two things have been proven to be inextricably linked. It isn’t just about attracting workers, it is also about attracting businesses.

The common argument for affordable housing is density. That is a very easy out. Density does not necessarily lead to affordability. We must be systematic in how we densify to ensure that we secure affordable housing. It isn’t enough to build – we must do so with purpose. Density is just one part of the puzzle. Here are a couple of ideas to ponder that I believe, if investigated, could help bring workers into Esquimalt TO LIVE, not just to work. For me, that is the goal for so many reasons.

​

- Increased density and zoning changes to allow more mixed use and live/work options.

- Investigating and partnering with non-profit and co-op housing organizations

- Inclusionary housing policies that require new developments to include a percentage of homes to be sold at below-market rates

- Implementation of a bylaw that protects tenants from renovictions that push them out of Esquimalt

​

Ultimately, this question is about housing equity in my mind. I am not an affordable housing expert but I do know that the right to housing is a thing. We must remove the barriers to investigating how we can welcome affordable housing initiatives into the Township to maintain the diversity that Esquimalt prides itself on.

 

Active Transportation - This is contentious, so I want to share my thoughts without political polish. If this is an important issue for you, then you deserve to know my thoughts and how I would proceed to vote on this if I am successful in this by-election.

I support a solid, active transportation network. I support bike lanes to Memorial Park. I do not support any of the alternative routes suggested, as they are not convenient or safe in my opinion. I commuted solely by bike for an extended period from Uptown to Camsoun College (both campuses) and then from each campus to Esquimalt Rec Centre. I used to load my bike on the bus when I had to go to the Lansdowne Campus b/c riding my bike was a nightmare. I tell you this so you understand that I am not making this statement with no understanding. I get it.

I also get that there is a balance. Spending a heap of money we don’t have to install an active transportation network that will have to be pulled out and reconstructed many times is not a cost-effective endeavour I can support. I believe that we should proceed knowing that we can build a fulsome network in stages. I am open to changing my mind based on research.

This is a very emotional issue and one that is all-or-nothing from both sides. Rarely is this a good way to make the best decisions. I want to seek a compromise, and I would love this conversation to move to one of working together versus working against each other.

The larger discussion that I would like to have surrounds the design. I have traveled to many places and have seen many iterations of bike lanes - many were very functional and attractive. I believe that we need to evaluate our current active transportation infrastructure to ensure that it is the best design for the community before building more. 

 

​