BOUNDARY CHANGE AAP - WHY THE RUSH?

WHY NOT A CIVIC BALLOT QUESTION?

Nanaimo City Hall Says the Snuneymuxw Boundary Change Is Not About Services. It’s About Votes.

Nanaimo City Hall has now answered an important question about the proposed Snuneymuxw boundary extension, and in doing so it may have revealed the real heart of the matter.

The City says the boundary change does not automatically create new service obligations. Existing agreements stay in place. Any future service agreements would still have to be negotiated separately.

That matters.

For weeks, many residents may have assumed this proposal meant some major shift in water, sewer, roads, garbage, or other municipal services. But according to the City’s own response, that is not what this is.

Here is what the City confirmed:

• IR1 already receives City drinking water and fire protection.

• IR2 and IR4 already receive City water and sewer.

• IR3 has an agreement in place for future water and sewer service when infrastructure is built.

• No other typical municipal services are being provided by the City.

• Water and sewer are billed by user fee using bulk rates.

• No other service fees or cost-sharing arrangements are currently in place.

So what actually changes?

Voting.

Right now, some Snuneymuxw members living on reserve lands vote for Regional District directors. The City says that if this boundary change goes ahead, all members, regardless of which reserve they live on, will vote for Nanaimo Mayor and Council.

That is the real headline.

The City is effectively telling the public: this is not mainly a service expansion issue. It is a representation issue.

And that raises the question City Hall still has not answered clearly enough: what is the taxation link?

Ordinary municipal voting is tied to municipal jurisdiction and, in practical terms, to a taxation framework borne by city residents and property owners. So the obvious question is this: if voting power shifts to City elections, what corresponding municipal tax obligations, if any, go with it?

That is not hostility. That is not racism. That is not denial of anyone’s rights.

That is a basic governance question.

If people are being folded into the municipal voting structure, the public is entitled to ask how that fits with the normal relationship between representation, taxation, and service responsibility.

There is another issue too.

City Hall says the boundary extension creates no future service expectation or financial obligation. Maybe not automatically. Maybe not legally. But politics does not operate in a vacuum.

Once voting power changes, future pressure for expanded services may well change too. That does not mean it will happen tomorrow. But pretending the political implications do not exist is not the same as proving they do not exist.

And then there is cost recovery.

The City says water and sewer are billed. Fine. But are those arrangements fully cost-recovering? Does fire protection fully account for standby costs, capital costs, staffing, equipment, and long-term replacement? Or are Nanaimo taxpayers quietly absorbing part of that burden?

Again, fair question.

If City Hall wants the public to accept this proposal through an Alternative Approval Process rather than putting it directly on a civic ballot, then City Hall should welcome scrutiny, not avoid it.

At minimum, residents deserve straight answers to three things:

Who gets to vote?
Who pays what?
Who carries the long-term cost and pressure?

The City’s response has at least stripped away one layer of fog.

This proposal, by the City’s own description, is not really about expanding services today. It is about expanding voting rights tomorrow.

That is exactly why the public should be paying close attention now.