Skip to content
HighOnCity Toronto
BEYOND

Victoria-Saanich merger vote won't be binding this fall

BC housing minister blocks binding referendum on amalgamation, citing need for more financial analysis before voters decide.

· 2 min read · HOC Newsroom
Victoria-Saanich merger vote won't be binding this fall
★ FREE NEWSLETTER
Get the best of Greater Toronto in your inbox

The day's top stories, food & events — every morning at 7. Unsubscribe anytime.

The push to merge Victoria and Saanich has hit a regulatory wall. B.C. Housing and Municipal Affairs Minister Christine Boyle refused to order a binding referendum on the question this fall, backing away from what many saw as a done deal.

A citizens' assembly spent over 2,500 hours weighing the question and recommended letting voters decide once and for all with a binding vote. The province provided $750,000 in public funding for the process. But in an April letter only made public last week, Boyle said she needed "more detailed analysis of financial implications, transition considerations, and service impacts" before she would approve a binding referendum.

Both Victoria City Council and the District of Saanich are considering putting a non-binding question on the October 2026 local election ballot: "Do you support Saanich and Victoria becoming one municipality?" Victoria's council will discuss the matter Thursday, June 25; Saanich's already considered it Monday.

Trevor Barry, chair of the group Amalgamation Yes, called the minister's refusal an "about-face, and a sneaky one." "We want a binding referendum," he said. "The next time there is a question on the ballot, it should be the binding question."

Victoria, which includes the downtown core, has a population of about 94,000. Saanich, largely suburban, has about 126,000 residents. Together they form two of 13 municipalities in the Capital Regional District.

The minister cautioned that any non-binding question must clearly signal to voters that additional work and information will be required before she orders a binding vote. "The proposed question may not clearly signal to the electorate that additional work and information on costs and governance will be required," Boyle wrote.