Fact: Courtenay property tax burden equal or lower than most same-sized BC cities

Fact: Courtenay property tax burden equal or lower than most same-sized BC cities

Photo Caption

Fact: Courtenay property tax burden equal or lower than most same-sized BC cities

By

The first in a series of articles about City of Courtenay finances

T he dominant issues in local elections usually revolve around money. It makes sense, because municipalities rely almost exclusively on their share of the property tax to keep the community’s water taps flowing and its toilets flushing.

Property taxes are the price homeowners pay for the services the municipal government provides. And just like the cost of eggs and gas, property taxes go up every year.

Not all voters complain about their taxes – many recognize the value they receive in services like recreation, policing, garbage collection and water and sewer infrastructure – but most pay at least casual attention to the annual increase of this household expense.

However, when municipal elections roll around every four years, the property tax burden, and generally how the local government spends your money, takes a front row seat.

This is particularly true in the absence of any overriding issues. In well-run municipalities, new candidates seeking to upset the incumbent mayor and council members historically point fingers at “unnecessary spending” and make promises to “lower your taxes.”

It’s an age-old tactic. What voter doesn’t want lower taxes? But what voter also wants the downside of lowering taxes, such as park closures, reduced hours at recreation centers and pot holes going unfilled in front of their homes?

Every mayor and council member struggles with this problem: how best to balance maintaining services and making improvements with the least necessary tax increase.

It’s difficult because a community has diverse wants and needs. And also because, according to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, local governments are responsible for 60 percent of all infrastructure in Canada but receive only $0.09 out of every dollar of taxes paid in Canada.

Nevertheless, the city finances have enveloped this year’s races for public office.

New candidates for council aligned with former councillor and mayoral candidate Manno Theos are following the “spending is out of control” and “taxes are too high” playbook to build momentum for the Oct. 17 elections.

Theos and his supporters have attacked a handful of projects undertaken over the last four years – such as the Sixth Street pedestrian and cycling bridge, a Back Road traffic circle, bicycle lanes and more – as unnecessary spending on things they believe the community doesn’t want. They also propose to cut taxes and seem to suggest that the city has too many employees who are paid too much money.

“The facts are that this council is doing the politically hard stuff that previous councils were afraid to do,” says incumbent Councillor Will Cole-Hamilton. “Even though they knew these things needed to be done”

These are valid points of view, even though their social media platforms overflow with rage-baiting posts and insulting personal comments that undermine their own credibility.

The public must accept and election challengers should respect that when voters give a mayor and council members the responsibility of deciding how to spend their taxes, they should expect that each group will do it slightly differently.

One mixture of council members might prioritize building a bridge while a different group of councillors would build a convention center. Yet another bunch might choose to spend no money on anything at all.

And it may also be true that each group could have equal amounts of support from separate parts of the community.

The real question for voters, then, is not whether money was spent on this or that, but whether the city’s finances have been managed competently.

So let’s look at some facts.

PROPERTY TAXES

To assess whether a municipality’s property taxes are high or low, the province applies its tax rate to a representative house, a median-value property sometimes called “a typical home.” This standardization makes it easy to compare the tax burden between municipalities.

It’s important to note that about one-third of the property tax total goes to schools, the regional district and hospitals. The municipality is required to collect the total tax and redistribute it.

The total 2025 residential taxes and charges on a representative house in Courtenay was $5,717. That’s lower than both Comox ($5,743) and Cumberland ($5,776).

The accompanying chart shows that Courtenay’s 2025 tax burden was slightly below the middle of similar-sized cities, and near the bottom of Island municipalities.

City of Courtenay staff chart

In the 2026 taxation data released last month, Courtenay’s taxed $6,115 on a typical house. That’s still lower than Comox ($6,121) but slightly higher than Cumberland ($6,049). Here are a few other comparisons from the provincial data, which you can see in total here.

– Langley:: $7,274
– Penticton: $6,190
– Squamish: $8,130
– White Rock: $10,015

The 2026 provincial data shows that the tax burden on Courtenay homeowners is about the same as on residents of similar communities. It’s higher than some and lower than others. It raised taxes by about the same amount as Comox and by less than Parksville.

We have not yet seen any social media rage of “unnecessary spending” in Comox or heard of any candidates there selling the “I’ll lower taxes” promise. Although it did build two controversial traffic circles this year.

If, as the data shows, the tax burden on Courtenay homeowners is not significantly different from similar communities – and it is lower than most – then the claims by some of the new candidates that the city’s taxes are unreasonably high cannot be accurate.

Perhaps Manno and the other candidates simply believe that taxes in general are too high. It’s a valid point of view, but not a fair or meaningful way to assess the city’s financial competency.

 

MANAGING CITY ASSETS

Municipal governments have a limited role and responsibilities. They primarily operate and maintain local infrastructure like roads, water, sewer, public works and garbage collection. They maintain and operate parks and recreation centres. They license businesses, create Official Community Plans to dictate land use and zoning. And they provide fire, police and emergency services.

Connected to those operations, the City of Courtenay has $896 million in assets, which includes water and sewer pipes, roads and parks. Much of it was created 50-plus years ago.

The city estimates that about 10 percent of these assets have been overdue for replacement.

That’s because councils prior to the 2018 election, on which Theos served, had taken a Do Nothing approach. They put off improvements and fixed things only when they broke. Emergency repairs typically cost four times more than planned maintenance.

And when they did repair or replace assets, they funded it with debt.

The Do Nothing strategy was effective in keeping tax increases temporarily and unrealistically low. But in reality those previous councils were just pushing the tax burden of unfunded liabilities onto future councils and taxpayers.

The need did not disappear. The cost just escalated.

“The facts are that this council is doing the politically hard stuff that previous councils were afraid to do,” says incumbent Councillor Will Cole-Hamilton. “Even though they knew these things needed to be done”

For example, when council first recognized that the Fifth St bridge required some repairs, federal and provincial grants would have covered two-thirds of the cost, leaving only a third for local taxpayers. But then-mayor Larry Jangula and former councillor Theos did not prioritize the project.

When the bridge repair could no longer be delayed for public safety concerns, the current council had to ask for an extension to the grant. But the cost had now doubled.

As a result, grant funding only covered one-third of the cost. Local taxpayers paid more.

The planned 2027 water metering project is another example. When it was first discussed, some 14 years ago, the cost estimate was $16 million. But then-mayor Larry Jangula again chose not to push it forward.

Now, as drier climates make water conservation necessary, the price to install meters in Courtenay has jumped to $32 million.

The ideology behind previous councils’ Do Nothing philosophy trickled down to the staff and created a corporate culture of avoiding new projects. In reality, previous councils had also kept staffing levels too low to do anything but the bare minimum.

“The days of two percent tax increases are not coming back anytime soon,” says retiring two-term Councillor Melanie McCollum. “Because to achieve that would require going back to doing nothing, stopping improvements, reducing services and cutting staff.”

The current council, most of whom were first elected in 2018, including Cole-Hamilton and McCollum, has adopted a more structured two-prong approach to financial planning over the last eight years.

They passed a comprehensive Asset Management Bylaw in 2019 and later created a Strategic Infrastructure Investment Program (SIIP).

 

ASSET MANAGEMENT BYLAW

Courtenay was the first city in British Columbia and the second in all of Canada to enact an Asset Management Bylaw. Councillor Cole-Hamilton introduced the motion immediately after taking office.

The bylaw, which only impacts new projects, directs council and city staff to explicitly consider full life-cycle costs — including planning, procurement, creation, operation, maintenance, renewal and decommissioning — when making decisions regarding the acquisition, upgrade or replacement of Tangible Capital Assets.

And it mandates the evaluation and consideration of natural assets (for example, wetlands, urban forests, natural drainage pathways) alongside or as alternatives to traditional engineered and constructed infrastructure wherever feasible.

“The goal of asset management is achieving sustainable service delivery: ensuring that current community services are delivered in a socially, economically, and environmentally responsible manner that does not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their own needs,” said former Chief Administrative Officer David Allen in 2019.

Since then, Courtenay has based its capital budget on up-to-date detailed information about what assets have failed and which are projected to fail within two years. It’s complicated work using a computerized system the city developed to help operate all the existing assets for the longest possible time and the lowest possible cost over their lifespan.

“Managing our assets involves identifying all the renewal needs, planning the work to avoid disruption of service and having a long-term financial strategy to pay for it,” Cole-Hamilton said.

“This means tax increases sometimes but it heads off bigger financial problems and potentially huge tax increases down the line.”

 

STRATEGIC INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PROGRAM

In addition to the Asset Management Bylaw, the city created a Strategic Infrastructure Investment Program (SIIP) three years ago to address its annual asset renewal shortfall of nearly $9 million.

The program’s goal is to set aside funds to maintain the $896 million of assets that already exist. So that when roads, water lines and other assets need repair or replacement the city can avoid massive borrowing that creates debt.

The general rule for municipal infrastructure expenses is 80/20. The initial cost is 20 per cent and the operation, maintenance and replacement is 80 percent over the assets’ lifetime.

To save this money, the city began adding a 1.5 per cent tax increase three years ago that will grow incrementally and compound – 1.5 percent the first year, 3.0 in the second, 4.5 in the third and so on – each year for 10 years. Then the fund will be large enough to maintain its existing infrastructure without borrowing.

“The goal is to not borrow from the future to pay for fixes today,” said McCollum. “People who are using an asset should pay the cost of eventually repairing or replacing that asset when it wears out.”

With these two key initiatives, this council has created a structured work plan, for the first time in decades. McCollum says it took political courage to do, because nobody wants to pay more taxes, “but everybody wants a well-run and maintained city.”

Councillor Doug Hillian, a 17-year council veteran, says any candidate promising to lower taxes must identify what services and which staff they are planning to cut, “because the cost of running a city goes up with the cost of living” higher taxes are necessary each year to maintain the existing level of services.

“People are moving to the Comox Valley to escape wildfire smoke or extreme weather in other places, so the taxes here don’t seem to be an issue,” Hillian says. “In fact, taxes here are the same or lower than where they came from and our taxes are comparable to similar sized communities around the province.”

 

NEXT: Can municipalities be run like a business? And, later, a look at Courtenay’s Capital Plan and its debt.

 

 

 

 

 

KEY ELECTION DATES

Candidate filings end this Friday, Sept. 11. Click our Candidate post for the updated list.

Sept. 11 — candidate filing deadline

Sept. 19 — campaigns can officially begin

Oct. 7 — advance voting begins.

Oct. 14 — a second advance voting opportunity

Oct. 17 — Election Day

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More

Overwhelmed by so many candidates? Just vote for the ones you know and like

For many Valley residents, it’s difficult and time consuming to gather the necessary information to make thoughtful selections in municipal elections. And paid trolls and fake posters on social media pages make it even more difficult. Public candidate forums help, but there is a simple solution for frustrated voters

Merville water bottling issue returns to the CVRD, highlights provincial water policies

Merville water bottling issue returns to the CVRD, highlights provincial water policies

The Merville issue is about land use but draws attention to outdated provincial water policies

Merville water bottling issue returns to the CVRD, highlights provincial water policies

By

The long-awaited rain finally began to fall on Vancouver Island this week, but it’s the drought that extended from summer through fall that has geologists, water system managers and homeowners who depend on wells worried about our groundwater supplies.

The driest fall in decades shut down the BC Hydro power generator on the Puntledge River for the first time in more than a half-century. Mt. Washington aquifers were so depleted, the resort asked skiers not to bathe and bring their own drinking water.

All around the world, and particularly in the American southwest, water shortages have reached dire levels. And that will ultimately concern Comox Valley residents when California and Mexico can no longer supply us with abundant fruits and vegetables.

If this trend continues – and an irreversible climate change insures that it will – we will need Island farmers to fill that gap, which in turn means a higher demand for groundwater supplies by local agriculture.

What this all adds up to is that water for drinking and growing food are destined to become the center of controversial public policy. Who has access? How will water supplies be rationed equitably?

That debate will take center stage at Monday’s meeting (Jan. 9, 2023) of the Electoral Services Commission when regional directors consider an amended application for a water bottling and distribution operation in Merville.

The Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development (FLNRORD) – now known as Land Water and Resource Stewardship (LWS) – issued a conditional water license nearly five years ago to Christopher Scott MacKenzie and Reugla Heynck. The license permitted the couple to extract up to 10,000 litres of groundwater per day on their Sackville Road property.

The license required the couple to “make beneficial use of the license” by Dec. 31, 2020. But when the Comox Valley Regional District denied a rezoning application to vary existing land use regulations, it stopped the couple’s original business plan.

Bruce Gibbons, the founder of the Merville Water Guardians that opposes this groundwater extraction, learned last April that LWS had received an application to amend the couple’s water license. The ministry referred the application for an amendment to the Comox Valley Regional District to determine if the amended purpose of the license would now meet existing bylaw and zoning requirements.

Neither the LWS nor the CVRD has disclosed the details of the application for amendment. But sources within the regional district say the issue will be on the agenda for the Jan. 9 Electoral Areas Service Commission (EASC), which would normally be released on Friday, Jan. 6 before the meeting.

Our sources also say that the regional district staff has passed the application to amend the water license on to the K’omoks First Nation and other affected groups, and also that the Merville Water Guardians will make a presentation at the same meeting.

The extent of the regional district’s authority in this issue is limited to its land use regulations. Does the proposed amended use meet current zoning laws? It cannot rule based on the larger issue of protecting groundwater supplies or other universal water issues.

MacKenzie is perfectly within his rights to pursue the use of the water license he was given by the provincial government.

That said, some serious questions should be asked of the LWS ministry why an application to amend his license was accepted and why his license remains valid nearly two years after not complying with the major condition of his original license.

And given the acceleration of climate change causing water crises all over the world, doesn’t it seem prudent, even urgent for our provincial government to put a moratorium on issuing any new groundwater extraction licenses and to suspend the licenses that haven’t been activated?

Knowing the difficult political and ethical discussions looming over provincial water policies, the government must initiate a full-scale review of our approach to water that reflects our new reality. To do otherwise will open a deluge of trouble.

 

There are numerous citizen action groups focused on water, including the Canadian Freshwater Alliance, which has supported the work of the Merville Water Guardians. There is also the Vancouver Island Water Watch Coalition. Here’s a link to some others.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10 WATER FACTS

Compared to today, five times as much land is likely to be under “extreme drought” by 2050.

Unless measures are taken, California will demand three times more groundwater than can be supplied over the next 100 years.

By 2035, the world’s energy consumption will increase by 35 percent, which in turn will increase water use by 15 percent according to the International Energy Agency.

In 2050 increased population will result in a 19% increase in agricultural water consumption.

Water demand is projected to grow by 55 percent by 2050 (including a 400-percent rise in manufacturing water demand).

According to satellite images, the Colorado River Basin has lost about 65 cubic kilometers (15.6 cubic miles) of water from 2004 to 2013. This is twice the amount stored in Lake Mead.

For decades the Ogallala Aquifer in the United States, one of the world’s largest aquifers, has tapped at rates thousands of times greater than it is being restored.

Over the past 40 years the world’s population has doubled and use of water has quadrupled.

According to the U.S. Intelligence Community Assessment of Global Water Security, by 2030 humanity’s “annual global water requirements” will exceed “current sustainable water supplies” by 40%.

By the year 2040 there will not be enough water in the world to quench the thirst of the world population and keep the current energy and power solutions going if we continue doing what we are doing today.

Source: Seametrics.com

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More
The Week: Valley councils begin new terms, but will Comox ignore voters?

The Week: Valley councils begin new terms, but will Comox ignore voters?

The Week: Valley councils begin new terms, but will Comox ignore voters?

By

The Comox Valley’s new municipal councils will begin their four-year terms this week after swearing-in ceremonies and approving each mayor’s annual committee assignments and board appointments.

While it’s one of the prerogatives of a mayor to appoint council members where a councillor may be best suited or where a councillor can best represent the public’s interests, the appointments are not automatic. The council must vote to approve the mayor’s selections.

Courtenay Mayor Bob Wells told Decafnation recently that councillors have always approved his appointments, which he makes after one-on-one conversations with council members to elicit their interests.

And, if you are geeky enough about local politics to find last year’s first meeting of the Comox Council, you can listen to Ken Grant and Maureen Swift speak eloquently and passionately about supporting then-mayor Russ Arnott’s appointments. More specifically, you can hear Grant and Swift point out that going into the fourth and final year of a council’s term wasn’t the right time to change the town’s two seats on the Comox Valley Regional District board.

The best time to change, they argued, would be at the start of a new term.

Well, here we are, at the start of a new term.

So what, dear readers, do you think will happen at tomorrow night’s first meeting of the Comox Town Council? We’ll tell you what we think should happen.

First-time Mayor Nicole Minions should respect both the continuity of service and voters’ clearly expressed wishes. And so, she should therefore appoint Maureen Swift and Jonathan Kerr as the town’s representatives on the CVRD board.

That combination offers a mix of experience and fresh perspective.

Swift, who has served multiple terms as one of the town’s regional representatives provides the continuity. Kerr, who was by leaps and bounds the top choice of Comox voters in the election, has the support and confidence of the council’s constituency.

Kerr received 76.4 percent of the popular vote last month. Swift received 51.7 percent and, in fifth place, Ken Grant lagged at 50.3 percent. Kerr got 152 percent more of the vote than Grant.

The people prefer Kerr far more than Grant.

And there is a good reason for that. Grant has not done a good job on the regional board of representing the majority of the voting public or even the majority view of Comox councillors. He’s been obstructive, and non-collaborative and has taken positions based on an agenda not in sync with the best interests of the public or other council members.

He is, in fact, an outlier of the majority view of Comox voters. Recognizing this, Councillor Swift should break with the “good ole boys” and vote her conscience to approve Kerr’s appointment to the CVRD.

So, that’s what should happen.

Here’s what will probably happen.

Mayor Minions will appoint Councillor Kerr as a CVRD representative along with either Swift or Grant. New councillors Chris Haslett and Steve Blacklock will take direction from Councillor Grant and vote to oppose the mayor’s wishes and then vote to approve Grant and Swift to the CVRD. Swift won’t have the courage to break rank. The vote will take place outside of the public’s view.

And that, friends, will set the council up for four years of ignoring voters’ wishes as expressed in the last election. Because Blacklock and Haslett will offer up their shiny brown noses to Grant, who will become the de facto backroom mayor.

Is Comox reverting to the old days of backroom politics, of deals made out of sight of the public, of personal gain trumping the common good? Tomorrow night’s first meeting of the new council will tell you all you need to know.

If you were anywhere even close to Comox town boundaries last night, Halloween night, you would have heard lots of fireworks. It started after dark and by 10 pm there was a full-on fireworks display happening.

It’s curious, of course, because no jurisdiction granted permits for the possession and sale of fireworks this year. That’s because the BC Wildfire Service banned fireworks this fall due to extremely dry conditions.

We’ve had a little bit of rain recently and burning bans have been relaxed, although the forests are still dry and, more importantly, no fireworks permits have been issued.

So the explosion of fireworks last night ignored the common good, including potential fire risks, for a few people’s personal enjoyments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More

Overwhelmed by so many candidates? Just vote for the ones you know and like

For many Valley residents, it’s difficult and time consuming to gather the necessary information to make thoughtful selections in municipal elections. And paid trolls and fake posters on social media pages make it even more difficult. Public candidate forums help, but there is a simple solution for frustrated voters

“Liberal Rush” tricked voters in NDP ridings and exposed an electoral system flaw

Despite the positive big picture outcome, this election exposed a glaring vulnerability within our electoral system. And that vulnerability caused otherwise smart people to forget how our Canadian parliamentary system actually works. Namely: We do not have a proportional representation form of government. But there is a simple solution.

Here’s the latest Comox Valley local government election results

ELECTION 2022

Here are the latest preliminary results from Civic Info BC. A * preceding a candidate’s name indicates an incumbent. Decafnation will update results as they become available. The boldface type indicates elected candidates.

VOTING DATA 2022

COURTENAY: 5,854 votes cast; 25.9% turnout of eligible voters

COMOX:  3,412 votes cast; 28.5% turnout

CUMBERLAND:  1,420 votes cast; 41.9% turnout

CVRD:  5,245 votes cast; 26.2% turnout

VOTING DATA 2018

COURTENAY:  7,372 votes cast; 37.1% turnout of eligible voters

COMOX:  4,392 votes cast; 40.4% turnout

CUMBERLAND:  2,892 votes cast; 48.0% turnout

CVRD:  Voter turnout per electoral area not available; 29.1% overall

COURTENAY

MAYOR

*Bob Wells: 3,277

Erik Eriksson 1,802

Aaron Dowker: 751

COUNCIL

*Doug Hillian: 3,067

*Will Cole-Hamilton: 3,066

Evan Jolicoeur3,049

*Melanie McCollum: 2,920

*Wendy Morin: 2,868

*David Frisch: 2,448

Brennan Day: 2,223

Jin Lin: 2,150

*Manno Theos: 2,118

Starr Winchester: 2,056

Deana Simpkin: 1,479

Steffan Chmuryk: 702

Phil Adams: 977

MIchael Gilbert: 796

Lyndsey Northcott: 684

 

COMOX

MAYOR

Nicole Minions: Acclaimed

COUNCIL

*Jonathan Kerr: 2,607

Jenn Meilleur: 1,937

Steve Blacklock1,922

*Maureen Swift: 1,764

*Ken Grant: 1,716

Chris Haslett: 1,411

Peter Gibson: 1,184

Kealy Donaldson:  1,089

Don Davis: 761

Ruby S: 750

 

CUMBERLAND

MAYOR

Vickey Brown817

*Leslie Baird: 599

COUNCIL

*Jesse Ketler: 1,116

*Sean Sullivan: 1,005

Troy Therrien: 946

Neil Borecky: 883

Tanis Frame: 596

 

CVRD RURAL

Area A

*Daniel Arbour: 1,807

Tamara Meggitt: 346

Gordon Kennedy: 99

Area B

Richard Hardy: 766

*Arzeena Hamir: 743

Keith Stevens: 89

Area C

*Edwin Grieve: 1,039

Matthew Ellis: 356

THE SCHOOL DISTRICT 71 — BOARD OF EDUCATION

COURTENAY

*Janice Caton: 1,985

Shannon Aldinger: 2,992

Anita Devries: 1,702

Jasmine Willard: 1,168

 

COMOX

Susan Leslie: 1,396

Vicky Trill: 705

Randi Baldwin: 426

 

CUMBERLAND

*Sarah Howe: Acclaimed

AREA A

Chelsea McCannel-Keene: 1,112

*Kat Hawksby: 476

Keith Porteous: 362

AREA B

*Michelle Waite: Acclaimed

AREA C

*Cristi Sacht: 600

Kendall Packham: 540

THE ISLANDS TRUST

DENMAN

David Graham: 387

Sam Borthwick: 359

*David Critchley: 246

Wesley Ritter: 55

HORNBY

Alex Allen:  323

Grant Scott: 286

Jeffrey Rabena:  269

 

Our recommendations in the 2022 Comox Valley local government elections

Our recommendations in the 2022 Comox Valley local government elections

Our recommendations in the 2022 Comox Valley local government elections

By

In local government elections, the official campaign period lasts a mere four weeks. For some people, that’s long enough and they can’t wait for all the signs to come down and for hopeful candidates to stop knocking on their door.

But that isn’t really much time at all for such an important event as choosing the future of your community.

But we understand that voting can be a difficult task. It takes a concerted effort to scope out which candidates will best represent your views because you don’t get a lot of help. There are too few all-candidate forums this year that allow you to assess and compare the candidates in person. That leaves local news outlets and social media as the primary distributors of helpful information.

Decafnation tried to interact with as many candidates as our resources permitted this year but we found it disheartening that some candidates refused to collaborate with us. While most candidates did respond to our questionnaires and answer questions via email, an unusual number of candidates did not.

We think that reflects a prevailing mood in this year’s local elections that turned dark and menacing after the ultra-conservative and secretive group Take Back Comox Valley published advertisements that contained intentional misinformation.

Our candidate interactions, or the lack of them, have played a crucial role in determining which candidates we recommend today.

Some observations about our recommendations.

Four years ago, we generally supported qualified younger candidates because they are the ones who will have to live with the decisions our local governments make today. We respectfully encouraged the old horses in the race that their time had passed and that it was now time to let go.

Voters had similar thoughts, electing all but four of the candidates we endorsed for the region’s 22 local government positions. We did not endorse for school district trustees.

This year, we are again supporting that youthful and progressive movement so that they may complete their four years of work charting a path for the future of the Comox Valley suited to this modern time.

For example, the candidates we’ve endorsed understand that municipal-level decisions must always improve our adaptation to climate change.

That means, among other things, creating the opportunity to move around our communities without using a car, preserving a larger tree canopy, not giving in to urban sprawl and protecting future taxpayers from the unnecessary infrastructure debt it creates and supporting every practical policy to shift away from consuming fossil fuels.

We believe the local governments you elected in 2018 have made important strides toward a better future for everyone who lives here and that they have earned the chance to continue this work for another term.

It is the responsibility of incumbents to defend their record and it is the job of challengers to show why they would do better. This year, the challengers have failed to make that case.

Decafnation realizes that some readers won’t agree with our choices. We’re okay with that. Information, not persuasion, is our objective. 

We admire and congratulate everyone who’s stood for election. It takes courage and love of community.

Finally, look for our coverage of the District 71 Board of Education election, and endorsements, later this week.

Now, here are our recommendations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ADVANCE VOTING BEGINS TODAY. READ ON FOR TIMES AND PLACES IN YOUR AREA

——-

WHERE AND WHEN TO VOTE

General Voting Day is Saturday, Oct. 15 for all local government positions.

Comox Valley Regional District

General Voting Day and advance voting take place at the CVRD building in Courtenay from 8 am to 8 pm.

Go to this link for General Voting Day locations in the three Electoral Areas.

Additional voting takes place on Oct. 6 from 9 am to 12 pm on Denman Island and on Oct. 6 from 2 pm to 5 pm on Hornby Island

Courtenay

Advance Voting begins on Wednesday October 5, 2022, 8 am to 8 pm at the Native Sons Hall, and again on Wednesday October 12, 2022, 8 am to 8 pm at the Florence Filberg Centre.

General Voting Day, Saturday, October 15, 2022, 8 am to 8 pm at the Queneesh Elementary School, and at the Florence Filberg Centre.

Comox

Advance voting begins Wednesday, October 5 from 8 a.m. – 8 p.m. at the Comox Community Centre, and on Saturday, October 8 from 10 a.m. – 2 p.m. at the Genoa Sail Building at Comox Marina, and again on Monday, October 10 from 10 a.m. – 2 p.m. at the Genoa Sail Building at Comox Marina, and on Wednesday, October 12 from 8 a.m. – 8 p.m. at the Comox Community Centre.

General Voting Day runs from 8 am to 8 pm on Oct. 15 at the Comox Community Centre.

Cumberland

All voting in the Village of Cumberland takes place from 8 am to 8 pm at the Cumberland Cultural Centre. Advance voting takes place on Oct. 5 and Oct. 12

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.