Wednesday March 25, the SRD Board will receive a Report titled ‘Strathcona Gardens – Sub Regional Recreation Study’ which includes staff analysis and a consultant report titled ‘Strathcona Gardens Recreation Complex Funding Models Review’.
Motions for consideration in the report would move forward Quadra Island or Area C residents paying the same rate as other Service participants. If passed, this would see the average property on Quadra paying almost $600 more in annual taxes for the Strathcona Gardens complex – causing significant negative effects on people who call Quadra Island home.
Two formal AAPs, $122 million in debt: Area C wasn’t included
Rebuilding recreation facilities is a costly endeavour requiring significant debt, something Campbell River and Area D have been planning for years as sole Strathcona Gardens Service participants.
Within the last two-and-a-half years the Board has authorized two Alternative Approval Processes (AAPs) seeking elector approval for $122 million dollars of loans to rebuild the Strathcona Gardens swimming and ice rink facilities. Both AAPs passed, indicating a low level of concern for the increased annual costs of their recreation facility from the residents of Campbell River and Area D.
From the consultant’s report (page 12) “most regional funding models are formed out of a combination of necessity (e.g. major facilities would not be viable without a broader funding area) as well as a recognition of the benefits provided by recreation services.”
Quadra Island residents were given no say in the shouldering of the burden of long-term debt and it is completely out of order to now consider them as eligible to pay for this. Many residents have told me this equates to ‘taxation without representation’.
The August 2024 Recreation Report noted that “there are no known precedents for smaller island communities funding recreation facilities in adjacent urban centres on Vancouver Island”. It also stated that “A reasonable counterargument to establishing a sub-regional funding model for recreation is that residents in adjacent jurisdictions were not originally involved in the decision to build major facilities and incur the long-term legacy impacts and responsibilities of the facility. This argument is especially valid in smaller communities that offer an amenity type not typically found in similarly sized communities”. Quadra Island has significant on-island recreation amenities funded by taxpayers, unlike Area D.
Consistent community opposition and one request
Since this topic was first brought to the Board in 2023, residents of Area C have written letters, signed petitions, and presented as delegations about their strong opposition to joining the Strathcona Gardens Service and their desire for an Electoral Area C-only referendum.
Two delegations, two petitions, hundreds of letters
The Board has received two delegations on this topic with presenters speaking clearly about the constraints met by islanders accessing Strathcona Gardens, robust use of on-island amenities, the choice to live a rural lifestyle in tune with natural surroundings rather than proximity to indoor recreation facilities. Of utmost concern is the extraordinary tax increase; being devastating for too many, especially fixed income seniors.
The Board has received two petitions on the topic and hundreds of letters. A petition the Board received in May 2025 has 1226 signatories, 44% of the population of Area C. The petition stated, ‘we the undersigned voters and/or ratepayers of Electoral Area C are opposed to the inclusion of Area C in the Strathcona Gardens Service and any resulting contributions for the operation, renovation, and expansion of Strathcona Gardens except on an individual or family user fee basis. We respectfully request the SRD Board not consider inclusion of Area C into the Strathcona Gardens Service Area unless approved in a formal exclusive referendum of Area C voters/ratepayers’.
A petition received by the Board in March 2025 brought 484 signatures calling for ‘a referendum specifically in Area C to determine if we collectively support paying for the operation of Strathcona Gardens facilities’.
In addition to the petitions, 278 letters from concerned Area C residents have also been received by the Board. Many of these letters are signed with two names.
Questions of Review results
The Review begins by stating that it “fundamentally looks to explore two key questions: 1. Is there sufficient rationale to consider a more equitable funding model for Strathcona Gardens? 2. If yes, what should that funding model be?”
The report identifies that in the Cowichan Valley Regional District, all municipalities and electoral areas contribute to ‘regionally significant’ facilities based on use. Similarly, Ravensong Aquatics Centre is funded ‘based on actual utilization by residents in each jurisdiction’. (page 13)
Further, there are other models, such as the specified areas of Hornby & Denman Islands which have a Regional Recreation Contribution Service Agreement which pays 10% of the rate of landconnected Electoral Areas.
Consideration of these models was not included in the consultant’s report to the SRD Board. Despite the initial premise considering what the funding model should be, the only model offered is Quadra Island or Area C residents paying the same full rate as other Service participants, which according to the charts in the report presented would mean Quadra Islanders paying more on average than residents of Campbell River who have much more ‘functional access’.
The data supporting the model presented, lacks clarity.
For example, the consultant included cell phone data analysis, “movement data sampling”, which shows 62,613 total adult visitations in 2024. 74% of adult visitors were derived from the Strathcona region; approximately 13% of visits and 12% of visitors derive from the Comox Valley/Nanaimo regions. The report states that between 2018 & 2025 (over eight years) the Gardens had 944 family clients from Area C. Does this mean 1.5% of adult users are from Area C?
The report also considers ferry usage statistics, which for islanders, is a strange metric to consider. In addition to daily commuters, tourists, etc, at least 15% of ferry traffic is headed to or from Cortes Island as well as the daily student counts from Quadra (and weekly from Cortes).
In conclusion
The consultant outlines that most Service expansions are borne from necessity, yet two recently passed AAPs disprove the necessity. For more than two years the residents of Area C have been clear and vocal in their opposition in paying for the Strathcona Gardens Service. It is up to the full Board to determine next steps. I strongly urge the Board to hear the community’s voice and that a referendum is held on Quadra Island.