After Victoria city councillors awarded themselves a 25 per cent pay raise, later placed on hold, one of the unanswered questions was what on Earth were they thinking. How could supposedly sensible people come up with something that tone-deaf?
A look at some of the musings of one of those councillors, Susan Kim, might provide an insight.
Here is Kim on the matter of the City of Victoria’s financial plan, which called for a 53 per cent tax increase over the next five years: “The only thing I can’t support about this is that I think the tax rate is too low. Listen, pundits, take this away — I’ll aim for a 90, 95, 99 per cent tax lift, take it away. We’ll see you then.”
And she went on: “I’ve said this before and I’m going to say this again, we as public government are the vehicle to transfer wealth to people who need it most, and I believe this is a lost opportunity, as every year prior has been.”
Where to start!
A 99 per cent tax lift? Canada already has the highest household debt levels of any G7 country. How would that help?
And whoever thought the mandate of municipal councils was to transfer wealth?
Though we can examine, with some precision, exactly what Kim means by transferring wealth. The pay raise she voted for would have taken her salary from $52,450 to $65,525. Yet the average salary in Victoria is only $54,000.
So the wealth transfer Kim had in mind was from local voters to herself, paid for by doubling the property tax rate.
Nice work if you can get it. But that raises a further question: How did she get that job? A look back at the 2022 municipal election shines light on the matter.
Nowhere in Kim’s campaign literature or speeches did she say anything about doubling taxes. Likewise not a word about her belief that the role of municipal councillors is to redistribute wealth, especially to themselves.
In response to a Times 91原创 questionnaire sent to all the candidates, Kim listed the usual topics as her priorities — housing, health care, the environment.
Remarkably though, she added: “I’m running to make Victoria affordable, sustainable and livable.” And doubling taxes will do that?
Her one “big idea,” as prompted by the questionnaire, was to allow community groups to request grant funding in their language of choice.
So are municipalities indeed charged with redistributing wealth? Kim should read her job description.
B.C.’s Municipal Act lays out in extensive detail exactly what local governments may and may not do. There’s not a suggestion, or even a hint, of any such mandate. There is, however, a section on what can be done about councillors who stray from the job in hand.
Section 184 of the act authorizes municipal councils to remove members whose behaviour has disqualified them from holding office. Failing a court challenge by the disqualified members, their office is declared vacant in six days.
Would Victoria city council take such a step against Susan Kim? We doubt it.
After all, four of her colleagues joined her in voting for the pay hike.
What we see here is much of what’s wrong with this council. Near total disregard for the needs of working class families in favour of legacy schemes, like spending $750,000 on a plan to overhaul Centennial Square.
Or councillors who embark on voyages of personal discovery, while all the time the city core marches downhill, with shuttered stores, blocked sidewalks and traffic-defying bike lanes.
Unfortunately, the next municipal election is still 30 months away.
>>> To comment on this article, write a letter to the editor: [email protected]
