FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Capital Region Municipal Amalgamation Society (“AmalgamationYES”)
Oct 12, 2026 “Referendum in 2030 is needed”
The board for the grassroots and volunteer-run local governance reform society known as AmalgamationYES (AY) calls upon new provincial leadership to ensure democratic processes are respected, and that we hold a Referendum (i.e. a Binding Ballot Question) regarding Amalgamation in 2030.
In previous statements, AY has made it clear that the most recent Municipal Affairs Minister, Christine Boyle, broke a government promise to the Citizens of Victoria & Saanich to follow the advice of the Victoria-Saanich Citizens’ Assembly (VSCA).
The VSCA recommended holding a referendum (not a plebiscite) this year and that doing so was warranted, given the abundant evidence available in the final study report of the VSCA (available at their website, VictoriaSaanich.ca).
“We were disappointed in the broken promise, and the secret nature by which we and the public found out about it,” said Trevor Barry, the president of AmalgamationYes. “But we have to move on. And it’s possible that the Minister may have a point about the benefit of further study regarding the one-time provincial costs of transitioning a municipal merger.”
While the VSCA Report reflected the advice from many experts who felt the demonstrated financial compatibility of the two neighbouring municipalities (along with the many aspects of municipal policy and local governance studied by the representative group of residents from across Victoria and Saanich) there was also criticism that the MNP study that accompanied the final report was light on details.
“The Minister, in her secret letter, revealed that she was uncomfortable moving forward with a Referendum before further financial implications could be studied, and meaningful consultations with Indigenous rights-holders could be arranged into a timeline matching public expectations,” Barry explained. “We may quibble with the legislative rationale and order-of-operations, but we agree that local First Nations would definitely need to be part of the conversation, and we would also welcome the Province fulfilling its duties in that regard, including providing the modicum of additional funding required to iron out the financial implications of transition.”
Once all these items have been brought to bear, the public deserves to see them, and have their proper chance to weigh in and ultimately decide, YES or NO on a two-way Amalgamation merger of Victoria and Saanich.
Councillors commented on these issues back during the spring, when the secret letter was made public. Jeremy Caradonna said that Victoria residents were “apoplectic” to discover the Referendum wasn’t going ahead, and similar comments of disappointment with the Minister were offered by Susan Brice in Saanich. Chris Coleman and Matt Dell in Victoria, on the other hand, disagreed with Caradonna about just waiting until 2030; they wanted to offer residents a plebiscite using the same question wording, as had been decided earlier that week by Saanich Council. Victoria and Saanich agreed to these plebiscites on divided votes in both cases. Colin Plant questioned the Minister’s letter, yet also agreed with its concern about the appropriateness of the wording (recommended by the VSCA for a binding vote) to be used on a non-binding vote.
Since those late spring meetings of the respective councils, both Mayors (Murdock and Alto) have opined to the media that if the vote on the plebiscite leans “NO” that the issue will be over. But AY vehemently disagrees. We again cite another Councillor, Teale Phelps-Bonderoff (who doesn’t support Amalgamation) who opined that regardless of how he felt about it, this was a bad-faith attempt to demean the democratic process. He employed a hockey analogy to describe the unfairness:
Imagine a hockey playoffs series where one team has to win 4 games, and the other team only has to win 1.
Combined, Saanich and Victoria voters have voted four times already on Amalgamation plebiscites. And the score is currently 4-0 toward Amalgamation.
“Whether we finish this 2026 period up 6-0 or only 4-2, the game cannot be over yet,” said Barry. “A non-binding vote, i.e. this plebiscite, does not capture the true democratic will of the people.”
Without a binding referendum, we do not experience a true public debate and conversation. And given the nature of this election season being drowned out by a provincial Snap Election call (to say nothing of new voting systems for School Trustees) — there has clearly been no focus on the pros and cons of Amalgamation, as currently recommended by the VSCA.
“And I can tell you,” Barry continued, “that as a canvasser in Saanich this campaign period, albeit on a different issue, I’ve knocked on over a thousand doors and had hundreds of conversations; and very few voters were even aware that Amalgamation was on their ballot (let alone that the VSCA process had happened), and many of those that were aware thought that it was a binding referendum, and they were confused why they hadn’t heard anything about it yet.”
Whatever the outcome on October 17th, AY believes this issue has received no appreciable nor credible attention. No media coverage to speak of. No meaningful dialogue between candidates. No voter awareness campaign. No nuanced lectures. No campaigning by neither YES nor NO side organisations.
The VSCA not only recommended moving directly to a binding Referendum, but that a referendum be held alongside an unbiased, neutral third-party information and voter awareness campaign. Such a campaign could help explain why the VSCA came to an overwhelming consensus in favour of Amalgamation, but it could also identify gaps and uncertainties in the reporting, as well as implications for services like policing and infrastructure debt financing.
“It also must be stated,” said Barry “that without a Binding Referendum, there is no impetus (in fact there is caution and resistance) from potential donors and volunteers to support both the YES and NO sides of the debate. As a result, debate has been nearly silent.”
It is understood that would-be donors and supporters of ours at AY do not wish to stir the pot with the next crop of elected leaders. Politicians of every stripe who all would find it very difficult to be re-elected in an amalgamated municipality where they would need to re-build their constituency coalition across a combined geographical population that is double in size.
And maybe that’s the point.
But voters are also electing MLAs in this region this month. And many (if not most) will be new people. And even the returning incumbents will be facing a new political reality; and even a returning government would be facing a different mandate.
We call upon the next legislature and provincial cabinet to become briefed on the VSCA/Amalgamation topic, the past 18 months, and what the next four years could look like to restore confidence and good-faith to democracy.
There needs to be a series of studies, consultations and voter awareness over the next four years, paid for under existing provincial municipal legislation grants, in order to properly hold a Binding Referendum in 2030.
April 29th letter attached: