Newsletter September 18, 2021 Did You Know…….?
Did you know that, besides the questions raised by Dr. Wilmut's Secondary Suite Survey Summary Critique, the following important information, revealed at the January 11, 2021 Council Meeting, was not provided to the public prior to the May 2021 Secondary Suite Survey?
January 11, 2021 Council meeting agenda item #1: Secondary Suite Report Strategy: Information provided during Council discussion:
If this information, had been provided to the public prior to the May 2021 Secondary Suite Survey, it could well have influenced the findings.
Most likely the 1500 estimated suite increase is based on Oak Bay’s being a vacation rental destination; that it borders on a large university and a college, both with limited student housing, and is the Capitol Region's most desirable place to rent. 1500 plus the existing reported 750 for a 2250 secondary suites total would be in over a third of Oak Bay’s single family neighbourhood dwellings. This would make Oak Bay the CRD leader and perhaps the BC leader in the number of suites per household.
A bylaw change to allow multiple tenants in suites, whose rents by legislation cannot be taxed by the District, would put a tremendous burden on the other taxpayers who would have to pay for the municipal services and staffing the new tenants would require. Even 2 tenants per suite would result in 3000 new untaxed tenants. When combined with the existing 750 untaxed suite population, and given Oak Bay’s tenuous financial situation and exceptionally high tax increases, this is clearly unsupportable.
(For Saanich's tax impact information please see Appendix #1)
Do not think for one minute that adding 1500 multi-tenant suites to Oak Bay has escaped the attention of the development industry and speculators. Charging multiple tenants on a per-head basis would bring in much more profit than the rents paid by the present two-tenant limit. (Note:Suite abuses and Airbnb legislation have been difficult and expensive to enforce.)
If a developer tears down an existing Oak Bay home and replaces it with a new, much larger one (this is allowed under the present uncorrected, liberal Zoning Bylaw), and then adds a suite, this would increase the present multi-million dollar price tag even more. So much for affordability.
See Dr. Wilmut's Critique’s full text at oakbaywatch.com. See Sept 21, 2021 Bulletin and Oak Bay Watch’s Summary – “Have you been misled?” Newsletter September 14, 2021.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective
Land-use changes that would add significantly more people to basement accommodation with limited-space, and shared ventilation is not “Good Governance”, “Excellence” or “Demonstrating Good Leadership”. It is also irresponsible.
Obviously this Council and staff do not understand:
It is also obvious that the Consultant’s and Planning Department’s Staff’s Secondary Suite Reports and Survey information and summaries are biased. It is self-evident they favour adding many more secondary suites to Oak Bay’s Single family neighbourhoods.
Although these documents identify some of the serious multi-tenant suite impacts they are referenced as “challenges” or “potential impacts”. The Secondary Suite Study Report states, “that this “may result” in increased non-compliance and decreased affordability” – when this has been proven to be the case in many other communities. The Secondary Suite Report also mentions there “may be” “Resource implications”, but does not indicate what these are.
Benefits, on the other hand are referenced as positive changes that will result in e.g., “allowing aging in place”, “mortgage helpers” and “reducing the financial challenges of entry into the housing market”. The Consultant and Staff reports fail to mention that these advantages are currently available under the current zoning rules. The 750 suites that the Consultant’s report mentions are already able to provide these benefits.
The Consultant’s Secondary Report provides a “Community Comparison” (4.1 page 112) “Policies in Neighbouring and Comparative Communities”.
However, the information charts provide limited and misleading information. For example, the charts show a high level of acceptance, but this is based on the number of new suites not general community acceptance. No enforcement costs, registration, compliance data or number of complaints are provided from the five other comparative communities.
It would have been much more informative to explain to Oak Bay residents that, if the Zoning is changed to substantially increase the number of suite tenants, what the associated costs will be. And how not being able to tax the suite owners rental incomes will increase taxes. Also to explain how effective the enacted suite bylaw conditions and restrictions the Report outlines, have been in other communities. Appendix #1 provides tax increase information that will be invaluable to Oak Bay residents and hopefully to some Council members.
(Saanich’s tax impact information see Appendix #1)
(Oak Bay Watch Note: If the amount of development and the additional tax revenue this generates, combined with their substantial business tax revenue in the Capitol Region’s two largest communities, is not sufficient to make ends meet, where will Oak Bay, already stretched, find revenue for the inevitable increased secondary suites': administration, enforcement costs, municipal services and staffing?
Please see Appendix #1 Information
_________________________________
“Residents aren’t opposed to changes that make things better; only those that make things worse”. Oak Bay Watch
Oak Bay Watch is a volunteer community association and its members have a variety of professional backgrounds in both the public and private sector.
*******Please help us continue to provide you with information about Community concerns and Council decisions and actions that impact you . Oak Bay Watch members also help community groups with their specific development concerns. Donate to Oak Bay Watch - even $5 or $10 dollars helps cover expenses for door- to- door handouts and helps us maintain our website. Oak Bay Watch is committed to ensuring the Community gets the full range of information on budget, governance and all key development issues – a well-informed opinion cannot be made without this.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Keep informed and sign up for our newsletter – bottom of Newsletter M
Appendix #1 - Saanich tax impact information
In mid 2018 Saanich reported it had 9000 illegal, untaxed secondary suites as opposed to only hundreds of untaxed registered suites. The overall number of suites in Saanich has risen dramatically from 2011. In 2021 Saanich Council changed their zoning to allow multi-tenant suites and infill garden and laneway suites.
Not surprising then that a Greater Victoria Taxpayer's Association recently reported: “Operating costs in Saanich are escalating much higher than in Victoria – hikes almost triple inflation.” “Most taxpayers are content to keep up with inflation or a little more, but not Victoria and especially not the District of Saanich.”
The Taxpayer's Association revealed that:
Saanich Council was split on recommending that the UBCM (Union of BC Municipalities) consider changes to residential assessment classes. The current B.C. Assessment Act applies the same taxation rate, despite one’s residential sub-class; single-family vs. multi-family homes.
BC Municipalities are starting to realize that applying situational mill rates to different types of residential properties would give municipalities the means to accurately assess and collect for the associated service and staffing costs of residential land use.
Council would be well advised, given Oak Bay’s limited tax base, to delay any land-use changes that have proven to result in significant tax increases for service and staffing costs, until such tax reform is in place.
Did you know that, besides the questions raised by Dr. Wilmut's Secondary Suite Survey Summary Critique, the following important information, revealed at the January 11, 2021 Council Meeting, was not provided to the public prior to the May 2021 Secondary Suite Survey?
January 11, 2021 Council meeting agenda item #1: Secondary Suite Report Strategy: Information provided during Council discussion:
- Estimated secondary suite administration startup cost could be as high as $200,000 or higher.
- The Consultant estimated that 1500 new suites would be added to the existing 750 referenced in the Secondary Suite Report Strategy.
If this information, had been provided to the public prior to the May 2021 Secondary Suite Survey, it could well have influenced the findings.
Most likely the 1500 estimated suite increase is based on Oak Bay’s being a vacation rental destination; that it borders on a large university and a college, both with limited student housing, and is the Capitol Region's most desirable place to rent. 1500 plus the existing reported 750 for a 2250 secondary suites total would be in over a third of Oak Bay’s single family neighbourhood dwellings. This would make Oak Bay the CRD leader and perhaps the BC leader in the number of suites per household.
A bylaw change to allow multiple tenants in suites, whose rents by legislation cannot be taxed by the District, would put a tremendous burden on the other taxpayers who would have to pay for the municipal services and staffing the new tenants would require. Even 2 tenants per suite would result in 3000 new untaxed tenants. When combined with the existing 750 untaxed suite population, and given Oak Bay’s tenuous financial situation and exceptionally high tax increases, this is clearly unsupportable.
(For Saanich's tax impact information please see Appendix #1)
Do not think for one minute that adding 1500 multi-tenant suites to Oak Bay has escaped the attention of the development industry and speculators. Charging multiple tenants on a per-head basis would bring in much more profit than the rents paid by the present two-tenant limit. (Note:Suite abuses and Airbnb legislation have been difficult and expensive to enforce.)
If a developer tears down an existing Oak Bay home and replaces it with a new, much larger one (this is allowed under the present uncorrected, liberal Zoning Bylaw), and then adds a suite, this would increase the present multi-million dollar price tag even more. So much for affordability.
See Dr. Wilmut's Critique’s full text at oakbaywatch.com. See Sept 21, 2021 Bulletin and Oak Bay Watch’s Summary – “Have you been misled?” Newsletter September 14, 2021.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective
Land-use changes that would add significantly more people to basement accommodation with limited-space, and shared ventilation is not “Good Governance”, “Excellence” or “Demonstrating Good Leadership”. It is also irresponsible.
Obviously this Council and staff do not understand:
- That to help stop the spread of this Covid virus infection, strict new restrictions have been enacted by the Province for “indoor public places”. This is because a number of people are in these limited indoor spaces.
- That the most congested areas of BC: Vancouver, Surrey and Richmond have by far the most pandemic infections.
- That Oak Bay has a disproportionate number of senior citizens – The Pandemic’s most vulnerable population.
It is also obvious that the Consultant’s and Planning Department’s Staff’s Secondary Suite Reports and Survey information and summaries are biased. It is self-evident they favour adding many more secondary suites to Oak Bay’s Single family neighbourhoods.
Although these documents identify some of the serious multi-tenant suite impacts they are referenced as “challenges” or “potential impacts”. The Secondary Suite Study Report states, “that this “may result” in increased non-compliance and decreased affordability” – when this has been proven to be the case in many other communities. The Secondary Suite Report also mentions there “may be” “Resource implications”, but does not indicate what these are.
Benefits, on the other hand are referenced as positive changes that will result in e.g., “allowing aging in place”, “mortgage helpers” and “reducing the financial challenges of entry into the housing market”. The Consultant and Staff reports fail to mention that these advantages are currently available under the current zoning rules. The 750 suites that the Consultant’s report mentions are already able to provide these benefits.
The Consultant’s Secondary Report provides a “Community Comparison” (4.1 page 112) “Policies in Neighbouring and Comparative Communities”.
However, the information charts provide limited and misleading information. For example, the charts show a high level of acceptance, but this is based on the number of new suites not general community acceptance. No enforcement costs, registration, compliance data or number of complaints are provided from the five other comparative communities.
It would have been much more informative to explain to Oak Bay residents that, if the Zoning is changed to substantially increase the number of suite tenants, what the associated costs will be. And how not being able to tax the suite owners rental incomes will increase taxes. Also to explain how effective the enacted suite bylaw conditions and restrictions the Report outlines, have been in other communities. Appendix #1 provides tax increase information that will be invaluable to Oak Bay residents and hopefully to some Council members.
(Saanich’s tax impact information see Appendix #1)
(Oak Bay Watch Note: If the amount of development and the additional tax revenue this generates, combined with their substantial business tax revenue in the Capitol Region’s two largest communities, is not sufficient to make ends meet, where will Oak Bay, already stretched, find revenue for the inevitable increased secondary suites': administration, enforcement costs, municipal services and staffing?
Please see Appendix #1 Information
_________________________________
“Residents aren’t opposed to changes that make things better; only those that make things worse”. Oak Bay Watch
Oak Bay Watch is a volunteer community association and its members have a variety of professional backgrounds in both the public and private sector.
*******Please help us continue to provide you with information about Community concerns and Council decisions and actions that impact you . Oak Bay Watch members also help community groups with their specific development concerns. Donate to Oak Bay Watch - even $5 or $10 dollars helps cover expenses for door- to- door handouts and helps us maintain our website. Oak Bay Watch is committed to ensuring the Community gets the full range of information on budget, governance and all key development issues – a well-informed opinion cannot be made without this.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Keep informed and sign up for our newsletter – bottom of Newsletter M
Appendix #1 - Saanich tax impact information
In mid 2018 Saanich reported it had 9000 illegal, untaxed secondary suites as opposed to only hundreds of untaxed registered suites. The overall number of suites in Saanich has risen dramatically from 2011. In 2021 Saanich Council changed their zoning to allow multi-tenant suites and infill garden and laneway suites.
Not surprising then that a Greater Victoria Taxpayer's Association recently reported: “Operating costs in Saanich are escalating much higher than in Victoria – hikes almost triple inflation.” “Most taxpayers are content to keep up with inflation or a little more, but not Victoria and especially not the District of Saanich.”
The Taxpayer's Association revealed that:
- “During the past 11 years operating costs in Saanich rose by a whopping 51.6% to $78.4 M, compared to 30.1% to $48.8 M in Victoria. In 2020, the tax burden on a representative house was $5,744 in Saanich - Increased services fees in Saanich account for most of the difference.”
- “Saanich residents will also pay more for sewer, water and garbage pick-up rates. Under proposed fees, the average homeowner will pay 10.52 per cent more for sewer and 1.51 per cent for water rates. Garbage pick-up fees will now range from $181.50 up to $240.48, compared to $174.60 to $231.60 last year.”
Saanich Council was split on recommending that the UBCM (Union of BC Municipalities) consider changes to residential assessment classes. The current B.C. Assessment Act applies the same taxation rate, despite one’s residential sub-class; single-family vs. multi-family homes.
BC Municipalities are starting to realize that applying situational mill rates to different types of residential properties would give municipalities the means to accurately assess and collect for the associated service and staffing costs of residential land use.
Council would be well advised, given Oak Bay’s limited tax base, to delay any land-use changes that have proven to result in significant tax increases for service and staffing costs, until such tax reform is in place.