The most consequential debate was whether Saanich should put an amalgamation question on the October ballot after the province declined to authorize a binding referendum. Council voted to ask, “Do you support Saanich and Victoria becoming one municipality?”; some councillors and public speakers objected that a non-binding vote could be misleading or unfair, while others said it would give voters a timely say. Council also approved a new climate plan, including a higher 2030 emissions-reduction target for District operations, and heard calls for stronger transit measures and protections against extreme heat. The meeting also referred a women’s housing proposal to staff and received the 2025 Annual Report for publication.
Generated from the recording's captions and the official minutes.
The Victoria Women’s Transition House Society described the housing barriers faced by women and families leaving violence. Its Harrison Place program in Saanich provides 22 second-stage units for women aged 45 to 65, but stays are limited to 18 months and residents often struggle to find a permanent affordable home afterward. The society asked Saanich to set aside at least 5% of new residential development as affordable housing for women and children fleeing violence, with specialist organisations involved in operating and supporting those homes. The discussion also covered how women-centred, trauma-informed housing differs from general Housing First programs, and a pause to provincial transition-housing funding.
Agreement
Councillors praised the society’s work and agreed that safe, affordable housing is important for people leaving violence.
Council referred the presentation to staff for consideration as they develop Saanich’s density-bonusing framework.
Send the Society’s presentation to staff to consider while they develop the density bonusing framework.
Official wording: That it be recommended that Council refers the presentation from the Victoria Women’s Transition House Society to staff for consideration when developing the density bonusing framework.
The province declined to authorize a binding referendum, citing a need for more information on costs, service impacts, transition issues and consultation with First Nations. Mayor Murdock proposed a non-binding ballot question as a way to gauge public support eight years after the last vote on whether to study amalgamation. Several public speakers opposed a non-binding vote: they argued it could confuse voters, waste time and money, or undermine the Citizens’ Assembly recommendation for a binding referendum. Others supported asking voters now, while one speaker said the question could help establish where Saanich stands. Council approved the non-binding question, “Do you support Saanich and Victoria becoming one municipality?” Staff said they would make background material—including the Citizens’ Assembly reports and the province’s letter—available neutrally; a yes result would not itself decide amalgamation, and further work would still be needed.
Agreement
Councillors expressed disappointment with the province’s handling of the request for a binding referendum.
Councillors agreed that the ballot wording should be clear and direct.
Staff said relevant background information would be made accessible while maintaining neutrality.
Disagreement
Some councillors supported a non-binding question as a timely way to hear from voters; others opposed it, arguing it would be an unfair or unbalanced substitute for a binding referendum.
Some public speakers urged council to delay the question or reject it; others supported asking voters in 2026.
Put a non-binding question about amalgamation on the ballot in the 2026 local election, following the Mayor’s memo. The vote would gather residents’ opinions; it would not itself decide whether Saanich and Victoria become one municipality.
Official wording: That it be recommended that Council authorize staff to place a non-binding public opinion question on the ballot for the 2026 General Local Election as outlined in the memo from Mayor Murdock.
Use the ballot question “Do you support Saanich and Victoria becoming one municipality?” to ask voters for their opinion on amalgamation.
Official wording: That it be recommended that Council approve the non-binding question cited on the ballot as “Do you support Saanich and Victoria becoming one municipality?”
budget finance1 public speaker1:29:06 Watch · Read
Staff presented the 2025 Annual Report, covering district services, progress on strategic priorities and audited financial statements. Highlights included more than $9.5 million in grant funding, 47% lower corporate greenhouse-gas emissions than the 2007 baseline, and 734,000 drop-in visits to recreation centres. A public speaker questioned rising expenses and debt and asked staff to report expenses per capita in future annual reports. Staff said inflation in construction and maintenance costs, along with major civic projects such as the fire hall and library, contributed to higher costs and borrowing. Councillors praised the report and noted that the audit was clean and unqualified. Council directed staff to publish the final report.
Agreement
Councillors praised staff’s work on the report and the clean, unqualified audit.
Councillors recognised the value of the grants and the services and projects described in the report.
Disagreement
A public speaker called for tighter control of expenses and debt and asked for expenses per capita to be tracked; councillors discussed the concern but did not add that request to the motion.
Routine: receive the 2025 Annual Report for information and direct staff to publish its final version.
Official wording: That it be recommended that the 2025 Annual Report be received for information and that staff be directed to publish the final version.
parks environment5 public speakers1:59:06 Watch · Read
Staff presented a five-year climate plan with 23 strategies across six focus areas. It sets a new target to cut the District’s corporate emissions by 65% by 2030 and identifies a further 58% reduction as a stretch target for Saanich’s emissions overall. Staff said transportation and buildings offer the greatest opportunities to reduce emissions, while measures such as compact neighbourhoods and climate adaptation can also reduce costs and protect health. Public speakers largely supported the plan, but the Better Transit YYJ representative said it should be more explicit about dedicated bus lanes on delayed corridors such as Lansdowne, Mackenzie, Interurban and Wilkinson; staff said transit priority measures could include bus lanes. A speaker criticised the plan’s title and said Saanich was not on track to meet its targets. Councillors also asked about cooling protections during heat waves, possible timing for a “right to cool” bylaw, funding and the plan’s proposed actions. Council adopted the plan; staff said work on cooling measures was already under way and could continue into 2027.
Agreement
Council supported adopting the climate plan and praised the work by staff and community contributors.
Councillors and staff agreed that Saanich cannot meet its community-wide climate goals without action and support from other levels of government.
Staff confirmed that transit-priority measures can include bus lanes and that the plan provides direction to continue work on cooling measures.
Disagreement
A public speaker disputed the plan’s title and said it overstated Saanich’s progress; other public speakers endorsed the plan.
The Better Transit YYJ representative supported the plan but argued that its transit actions should more clearly identify bus lanes and the scale of changes needed.
The meeting adjourned. The Deputy Corporate Officer said Council would then meet in a special Council meeting to ratify the evening’s decisions and consider final readings of two bylaws.