Column: Tax increase poor treatment

I’ll say this right up front: I’m not eager to pay several hundred dollars more per year in taxes to feel better about flushing the toilet.

I’ll say this right up front: I’m not eager to pay several hundred dollars more per year in taxes to feel better about flushing the toilet.

After decades of debate, bad publicity, many studies and one rejected referendum, Greater Victoria is about to spend $782 million on secondary sewage treatment.

For me, reality hit home when the Capital Regional District’s sewage committee released numbers that showed the possible tax hike for the average property. Living in a condo in Victoria, that’s about $300 or the high $200s (the average is $353) for my household. For my friends with a young family in Langford, it’s in the ballpark of $330. For my retired parents in Saanich, it’s an extra $230. If you are on a fixed income like they are, that’s a noticeable hit to one’s personal finances.

Looking back at the history of sewage treatment in Victoria, it’s hard to pry apart the ideology from the science, and what actually makes sense financially and environmentally.

Greater Victoria actually had a sewage referendum in November 1992. Residents had the option of paying nothing, paying an extra $232 in taxes per $100,000 of their property value (for primary treatment) or paying $336 per $100,000 of property value (for secondary treatment, which is what we are buying today).

If voting yourself a massive tax hike isn’t doomed to fail, I don’t know what is. Is it reasonable to expect that a person with a $200,000 home would voluntarily take on nearly $700 in extra taxes?

I’m pretty sure I voted for no tax hike back then, which, from one perspective, helped pass the buck to the current generation and my future self. Thanks for nothing, 1992.

Back then too, people in Washington State got all uppity about Victoria flushing its screened sewage into the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Some Americans even boycotted coming to Victoria, which was a credible threat when the U.S. dollar was worth something.

B.C. and Washington State banded together and funded a 1994 study that found effluent concentrations off Victoria mostly flowed over from Vancouver and Seattle, despite both cities having basic sewage treatment. The study found that discharges from Victoria had a “negligible” effect on the waters in the strait. Victoria isn’t at fault and we can blame Vancouver? Money well spent.

In 2005 I was working at the Ladysmith Chronicle when I met Mr. Floatie (a.k.a. James Skwarok), the famously effective mascot that upended science and the existing rationale with poop humour. Soon after, I called a CRD environmental staffer, who, clearly annoyed and for the millionth time, explained how the Juan de Fuca Strait diluted and flushed Victoria’s effluent to little discernible effect on the marine environment.

A few years later and after the province ordered secondary sewage treatment, the CRD’s official stance flipped 180 degrees. That must have taken quite a bit of employee re-education over at the Fisgard Street office. Repeat after me: “Screened sewage is bad, secondary sewage treatment is good …”

A major independent scientific review in 2006 on the impact of dumping screened sewage into the ocean agreed that the Strait of Juan de Fuca is pretty good at flushing effluent away, and that bacteria plumes only rise to the surface during major rain events. Basically, the risk to human health is minimal, unless you are swimming laps offshore in a storm.

The report didn’t let the city off the hook – it said Victoria’s contribution of contaminants is probably minor, but the CRD needed much better information on the toxicity and impact on the marine environment near the outflows. It didn’t recommend sewage treatment outright, but said flushing wastewater into the strait isn’t a long-term solution.

It’s tough to argue against that. But is jumping to expensive secondary treatment necessary? If some form of sewage treatment is inevitable, the tax burden needs to be phased in incrementally. Victoria is expensive enough. Suddenly raise taxes by $300 and something will hit the fan.

— Edward Hill is the editor of the Saanich News.

editor@saanichnews.com

Just Posted

Second cannabis dispensary earns Langford approval

The Original Farm Langford Ltd. plans to open in Belmont Market

Cathedral to hold inclusive memorial for those lost through overdoses

Christ Church Cathedral memorial to respect diverse spirituality of participants

Free cancer care workshops at SHOAL centre this May

Cancer charity InspireHealth offer patient-centred worhshops

Community members can hop over to Millstream Village for Easter Eggstravaganza

Easter egg hunt and other activities take place on Good Friday

Art Gallery of Greater Victoria receives $2.8M Anthony Thorn donation

Victoria News article inspires hefty donation for gallery expansion

POLL: How often does your family use BC Ferries?

Navigating the lineups for BC Ferries is a way of life for… Continue reading

Crime Stoppers most wanted for Greater Victoria for the week of April 16

Greater Victoria Crime Stoppers is seeking the public’s help in locating the… Continue reading

Federal government extends deadline to make Trans Mountain decision to June 18

The National Energy Board endorsed an expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline on Feb. 22

Prince George sweeps to first-ever BC Hockey League crown

Spruce Kings beat Vernon Vipers 3-1 in the Okanagan Wednesday for 13th straight playoff win

Hwang’s first MLS goal lifts Whitecaps to 1-0 win over LAFC

Vancouver picks up first victory of season

Child-proof your windows ahead of warm weather: B.C. expert

Fifteen children were taken to BC Children’s Hospital for falls in 2018

B.C. trucker pleads guilty to lesser charges in fatal Manitoba crash

Gurjant Singh was fined $3,000 and given a one-year driving prohibition.

Study links preschool screen time to behavioural and attention problems

The research looked at more than 2,400 families

Most Read