Regarding the potential $32 million infrastructure loan being discussed at the upcoming Sooke council meeting, I'm confused about the January recommendation to delay the byelection to coincide with a referendum they are now recommending for October 2026.
The latest update reads: If council's preference is to receive confirmation on grant funding prior to a referendum then it is recommended that the district conduct the assent voting (referendum) in October 2026. By this time, the district will have the necessary information to inform the public and meet the grant funder’s required timeline. Additionally, combining the referendum with the general local election is a cost-effective option.
Why didn't they say that in the first place, and why didn't council direct staff to review best options before delaying the byelection for the second time?
With a federal election looming, it would have been smarter to hold the byelection at the earliest date so that Sooke residents have adequate representation. The province should have denied the request under the Local Government Act as unreasonable.
Calling an immediate byelection was the only logical solution to much uncertainty and "what-ifs" of a federal election and grant applications. Yes, there is a financial cost, but we also have to consider opportunity costs and the cost of District of Sooke staff's time to keep shifting recommendations and resources.
The referendum to borrow $32 million is serious enough to deserve its own attention and due consideration, not to mention clear and accurate information sharing to dispel already swirling distortions on social media.
Council needs to make a decision that makes sense for the residents and the best interests of Sooke once and for all, and that is to ensure fair and full representation and to delay any borrowing until all funding options have been explored.
Katherine Strongwind
Sooke
