AAP NOT GREAT DEMOCRACY

 

Why the Hurry? If This Boundary Change Matters, Put It to a Real Vote

The City of Nanaimo is asking residents to accept a significant boundary change involving Snuneymuxw reserve lands. The stated purpose is to allow eligible residents on those lands to vote in Nanaimo municipal elections. That is a serious governance change. It deserves serious public scrutiny.

Instead, Council has chosen the Alternative Approval Process.

Under an AAP, if you support the proposal, you do nothing. If you oppose it, you must know about it, find the form, fill it out properly, and submit it on time. Unless 10 per cent of eligible electors respond against it — 7,957 people in this case — Council can treat the proposal as approved and move it forward. That is how the process works.

The City is perfectly entitled to use an AAP. But that does not make it the best democratic choice.

The City’s own material says elector approval for this boundary extension could be obtained through either an assent vote or an AAP. Council chose the AAP. What the City has not clearly explained is why a matter this important is being advanced through a low-visibility objection process instead of being put to a direct vote by citizens.

And the questions do not stop there.

The City says this boundary change will not create new City taxation authority over reserve lands. It also says the City would not be required to provide new services as a result of the extension. Existing servicing arrangements would remain unchanged. The City specifically identifies water and sewer as existing City services, and refers more broadly to infrastructure and transportation arrangements through existing agreements.

That raises obvious questions Council should answer plainly before asking the public to let this proceed:

What services are presently being supplied under those existing agreements?

Do they include only water and sewer, or also roads, drainage, garbage collection, transportation links, utilities, or other municipal-style services?

Are user fees already being charged for water and sewer? If so, how are those fees calculated?

Are there any other payments, cost-sharing formulas, or service agreements already in place?

And if the City insists this is only a voting-boundary issue, not a taxation or service issue, then why not put that clearly, directly, and publicly to Nanaimo voters on a real ballot?

The next general local election in British Columbia is set for October 17, 2026. If this proposal is sound, transparent, and fair, why not make the case openly and let the public answer it in the voting booth?

That is the heart of the concern.

This is not about being anti-Snuneymuxw. It is not about denying anyone respect. It is about democratic clarity.

If a boundary change is important enough to alter who votes in City elections, then it is important enough for the public to know exactly what current service arrangements exist, exactly who pays for what, and exactly why Council is using an AAP instead of a direct vote.

When the public is told to stay silent unless it objects loudly enough, that is not the strongest form of democracy.

For something this important, Nanaimo residents should not be expected to discover the issue by accident, decode vague service language, and scramble to file objection forms before a deadline.

They should be asked clearly.

And they should be allowed to answer clearly.

On a ballot.