From the desk of Regional Director Robyn Mawhinney
Hello,
At the beginning of the week I submitted a Director’s Report to the Discovery Islander which focused on results of the Quadra Island survey regarding Strathcona Gardens. Since then, there has been an SRD Board meeting where actions were taken to further the potential inclusion of Quadra Island properties in the Strathcona Gardens Service. This report shares news on that, as well as info from the survey which 626 Islanders participated in.
SRD Board action
Many Quadra community members with understandably strong feelings showed up at the April 29 Board meeting with signs, placards, and concerns about being included in the Strathcona Gardens Service. Bylaw 643 would add a significant tax burden to Quadra Islanders for a Service with $122 million in recently approved debt which Island residents had no voice in.
In a series of 7-6 votes, the Board moved three readings of Bylaw 643. This Bylaw amendment requires approval of the electors: the Board moved that approval of electors (aka binding referendum) be sought concurrently with the 2026 local government election. Frustratingly, the Board moved that ‘the voting be conducted throughout the entire service area and proposed service area’.
I argued strongly against a combined assent (referendum) process and offered an amendment that voting take place separately in the proposed service area, to provide Quadra Islanders with a meaningful voice. My reasoning was that if votes from the population of 40,000 voters within Campbell River and Area D are combined in one vote with those of about 2,000 on Quadra Island, it dilutes the voices of Quadra Island by a factor of 20:1. Unfortunately, my amendment was defeated and the ‘combined assent vote’ motion passed.
Not yet a ‘done deal’!
This is not the end of this story: the Inspector of Municipalities must still determine if the bylaw amendments meet the provisions of the Local Government Act. And, the Minister of Housing and Municipal Affairs, Christine Boyle, has the authority under section 349(5) to order that before the bylaw is adopted it must receive approval of the electors in ‘specified parts of one or more participating areas’. It’s clear that Quadra wants a voice and the Minister has the authority to order this.
Ministry news release
The Ministry of Housing and Municipal Affairs issued a statement to the Discovery Islander (pg 14, May 1 edition). It says in part, “If the regional district decides to proceed with the amendment bylaw and local area residents believe they were not adequately consulted, they can submit their concerns to the Inspector of Municipalities at the time the bylaw is submitted to the Inspector for review and approval”. As the Board has passed the bylaw amendments, the time to submit concerns to the Inspector is now (email [email protected] & [email protected]; call 250 387-4020).
The Bird’s Eye has set up a tool to help folks write letters to the Minister, find it at thebirdseye.ca/strathcona-gardens/; you’re welcome to ‘cc’ me.
Frustrations abound
t’s been frustrating that relevant facts on how other Island communities support recreation on ‘the big island’ were omitted from the recreation report by RC Strategies. My research uncovered info about Denman Island (as detailed in my previous report), and now Gabriola Island taxpayers, who contribute to the operating costs of recreation facilities in Nanaimo based on a usage basis.
In 2026 Gabriola’s contribution to recreation in Nanaimo is $100,157. Gabriola has a population more than double that of Quadra Island. In contrast, Bylaw 643 as supported by seven SRD Directors would take $754,491 annually off Quadra to pay for Strathcona Gardens and its $122 million debt which Quadra Islanders had no voice in approving.
A contravention of SRD Board Strategic Priority
Good Governance through proactively communicating and engaging with communities is a Strategic Priority of the Board: unfortunately, it was not a priority for the Board majority in this instance. Hundreds and hundreds of Island voices have asked for an exclusive referendum only to be entirely ignored. In my opinion, the Board majority, by ignoring the community in this way, has violated a strategic priority agreed upon by the Board.
About the survey…
(this section was written before the board meeting!)
Local proactive engagement thru a survey
Following the March 25 majority decision of the Board to move forward with a service bylaw amendment adding Quadra Island to the Strathcona Gardens Service, I determined it would be useful to have a survey and learn more from community members. I wanted to understand Quadra Island residents support for various levels of funding, provide space to hear constituents’ thoughts, and have data to share with the SRD Board.
Survey access
It was important to me that the survey was accessible to as many Islanders as possible, so I utilized several methods to reach the community. A link to the survey was shared in my community Director’s Report; I posted about it on social media; I made and pinned up posters with a QR code on bulletin boards around the island; the Bird’s Eye shared a link to it; and, paper versions of the survey were available at two locations on Quadra Island, including the Quadra Island library.
Huge community response
The survey was open for 16 days, and in that time 626 individuals took the time to share their perspectives: wow! The large number of responses really shows the high level of community engagement around this issue. I’m grateful for the range of viewpoints Islanders shared, thank you to all who took the time.
Data shared with the SRD Board
With the survey data I produced a Director’s Report for the SRD Board’. This report included three graphs and a summary of the written responses. My inspiration for the survey came in part from the recent work of the Regional District of East Kootenay where they ran a survey regarding a recreation contribution service to their Area C (a regional district providing proactive community engagement).
Survey results
On the question ‘how important is it to you that the SRD meaningfully consult thru a referendum exclusively with Quadra Islanders prior to adding an annual Strathcona Gardens tax to Quadra Island properties’, 95% of respondents answered ‘exceedingly important’. This confirms what I already understood, based on the petition of 1,226 signatures the Board received in 2025 requesting the same thing.
Usage: 87% of respondents never or rarely use the Strathcona Gardens recreation facility. Further context was provided by several people who responded ‘once every few years’, explaining that the visit was for a graduation ceremony or other large event. The remaining 13% of responses indicating usage ranging from once per year to more than ten times a year.
The question ‘what percentage of the annual Strathcona Gardens tax is most appropriate for Quadra Island property owners to contribute to Strathcona Gardens’ offered a broader range of responses. 46% of respondents said No Contribution; 25% of folks were okay with a 5% contribution (ie $30/year); 17% of folks said yes to a 10% (ie $60/year) contribution. Support beyond 20% (ie $120/year) was 2% of responses.
Community comments
Many households, particularly seniors and families, said the increase could create real financial hardship or risk housing stability. The huge property tax increase is viewed as especially unreasonable given broader cost-of-living pressures and existing local financial obligations such as the soon-to-be new fire hall and upcoming requirements of the QCove sewer system.
Residents strongly reject the assumption that Quadra has comparable access to the facility, highlighting that travel requires ferry costs, long wait times, and significant time commitment. Residents consistently highlighted unmet needs on Quadra, and that basic services like garbage collection should be prioritized over off-island recreation investments.
A small number of comments highlighted the importance of recreation facilities for youth and families, and long-term community benefits of investing in shared infrastructure. However, even supportive voices acknowledged concerns about cost, fairness, and process.
Provincial advocacy
As mentioned, the Ministry of Housing and Municipal Affairs has a role in this process. I’ve written to the Honourable Christine Boyle, Minister of Housing and Municipal Affairs, and the Inspector of Municipalities, outlining the community’s clear request for an exclusive binding referendum rather than a process which simultaneously polls the 40,000+ residents of the areas already within the service. This is something which can be ordered by the Minister, and I will be following up with her in short order.
Connect
You’re welcome to connect with me with questions or concerns: email [email protected], or call 250.203.2468. Visit RobynMawhinney.ca for links to helpful community resources and ‘back issues’ of Director Reports. Visit srd.ca/government/agendas-minutes to keep up to date on SRD governance happenings.
High five if you made it to the end of this extra-long report, thanks for reading!
Until next time,
Respectfully,
Robyn Mawhinney
Images in this report are from a recent walk through Main Lake Provincial Park to Yeatman Bay and that special low-tide-accessible islet, a perennial favourite of mine.