The City of Victoria already has spent $45K on its get-out-the-vote campaign which is designed to inform residents of the ins and outs of the upcoming referendum on the Crystal Pool replacement project. And this week, the question was: is that information biased?

On Thursday, Victoria’s city council voted on amendments to a motion designed to provide more “balanced” information to residents in the lead-up to the vote, scheduled for  Feb. 8. 

Some councillors argued that information coming from the city gives the appearance of promoting the project—potentially the costliest in the city’s history—and unfairly giving more weight to the “yes” side in advance of next month’s vote.

Victoria residents will be asked to vote on two things: whether the city should borrow up to $168.9 million to build it and whether they prefer Central Park North or Central Park South as its location. The finance question is binding while the location question is not.

A motion brought to the council by councillors Stephen Hammond and Marg Gardiner on Thursday included three recommendations:

1. Put a stop to one-sided advertising regarding the referendum

2. Replace upcoming advertising and information sessions (such as “pop up” locations), as well as the city’s website, to include arguments or reasoning for both the “yes” and “no” sides of the binding question on the referendum

3. Have this information vetted by the city manager before changes are made

The proposal to change the ads was defeated by a vote of 6-2 (Coun. Susan Kim was not present).

“We need this referendum to be clean,” Gardiner said.

Concerns were raised by Hammond that city bus shelter ads and a half-page ad printed in the Times Colonist on Dec. 29 featured language about the benefits of a revamped Crystal Pool that was biased. He referred specifically, in his presentation to the council, to the words “more accessible, sustainable, modern, more inclusive.” The same language also appeared, he said, in an ad taken out by the city in its Connect newsletter.

Hammond said the ads don’t include enough information about the costs and financial risks involved in a “yes” vote for the campaign. “If this project goes ahead and people are shellshocked by their tax bills I don’t want it to be because the public didn’t have all the facts,” he said.

Ad language is based on facts, city staffer says

Sheldon Johnson, the city’s director of communications and engagement, suggested the language— specifically the adjectives in the ads—represent project facts based on information the council received.

Some of those facts include numbers related to the cost to taxpayers, based both on the price tag for the project but also on future operating costs, should a new Crystal Pool be built. 

Derrick Newman, city parks & facilities director, explained that additional net costs to the pool’s operating costs would increase to 38% annually from roughly 35%. He said operating costs would rise to $2M annually, up from $1.3M, but that that number did not reflect potential offsets in future programming fees, garnered through sponsorship opportunities and parking fees. That number also would not include costs associated with any new programs based on expanded spaces and facilities.

Coun. Dave Thompson indicated that property taxes would not be raised to accommodate the project costs and suggested that instead, some public services would be cut to make that happen. 

“I think we do need to provide that information to the public,” he said.  

Coun. Jeremy Caradonna opposed the proposed amendments to the motion, arguing they were “predicated on the false assumption that staff is biased.” 

Timing is not right, says Dell

Coun. Matt Dell also opposed the motion, saying the council should have acted on this sooner.

“This is not the right time to do this and would cause a huge lift for staff and absolute chaos for the public,” he said. 

For Gardiner, the motion wasn’t so much about support for or against the pool project but more about communications about the referendum.

“I had hoped the city’s presentation would be neutral and that council would remain neutral as to not to influence public opinion,” Gardiner said. That changed when one, maybe two or three councillors became involved in community groups voicing their opinions on the referendum.”

“We’re not the ‘yes’ campaign, nor are we the ‘no’ campaign. They are at arm’s length from us,” said Coun. Chris Coleman. 

When asked about his participation in the “yes” campaign, Caradonna told Capital Daily: “I ran my [2022 election] campaign on a commitment to replace this aging facility.”

“The city is officially neutral on the referendum, and when I am fulfilling official city duties, I remain neutral,” he said. “That said, on my own time and in my private life, I am not neutral. I support the replacement of the facility.”  

Caradonna says he has participated from time to time in the “yes” campaign by delivering lawn signs.  

The BC Community Charter prohibits council members from participating in any discussion or voting on a matter in which the member has a direct or indirect pecuniary or other interest in the matter, as it constitutes a conflict of interest. Members are required to declare their interest in the matter and remove themselves from any meeting where the matter is under consideration.

Caradonna insisted there was no need for his recusal in the council because there was no pecuniary interest or other conflict of interest that would benefit him personally or financially.

“It's quite common for councillors to get involved in third-party referendum campaigns or to take a personal position,” he said.

Hammond has publicly taken a “no” position. He published an op-ed in the Times Colonist that echoes many of the talking points of the “no’ campaign. Dell has been openly “yes” on social media.

“The most important thing to me is that voters get out and exercise their franchise to vote,” Caradonna said. 

Kim raised the concern about the time remaining to course correct by producing new ads and dismantling pop-up kiosks before the date of the referendum.

According to Johnson, the city has already spent $45K on its get-out-the-vote campaign for the referendum, which began in December, and $75K on the pop-up info kiosks built by city staff, which began appearing in October.

Mayor agrees: this is not the time

Mayor Marianne Alto agreed, saying she would “find this challenging for staff to do, given the time sensitivity.”

Read everything you need to know before you vote, here.