The Capital Regional District’s request to bump its borrowing authority from $35 million to $85 million in the name of future affordable housing opportunities begs closer scrutiny.
It also raises the question of whether an alternative approval process (AAP) is the best way to achieve what the CRD is asking for.
Getting the go ahead for the borrowing bylaw as long as no more than 10 percent of the 331,905 eligible voters don’t give it the thumbs down or middle finger can hardly be considered a ringing endorsement.
RELATED: CRD seeks approval to double hosuing budget
You can also make a strong argument that AAPs have a dubious track record based on their historically low voter response totals, and this particular kick at the APP can has already come under fire for what some critics describe as cumbersome, and tech-heavy.
Then there’s the potential for creating the kind of acrimony that bubbles up before and after the process. Sooke residents may recall the discord that swirled through the community during the district’s APP on the future of John Phillips Memorial Park.
While some have called for a referendum instead, proponents of this AAP, including Sooke Mayor Maja Tait, have countered that would cost significantly more. The bottom line, however, is that whatever a referendum rings up is a pittance compared to the kind of money the CRD is seeking.
A referendum would also provide a clearer snapshot of where the public stands, more akin to the old adage the majority rules, rather than a process some say feels like an end around.
There’s no doubt that most people in the region support spending more on affordable housing, but addressing the best way to get the most out of the investment is a critical part of the equation as well.
Getting the most accurate gauge of where taxpayers stand on a $50 million bump should be the objective of any process seeking a yeah or nay.
