Affordable housing seems not only to be the front-running topic in our upcoming municipal election but on the provincial slate as well.
David Eby, who is campaigning to replace John Horgan as B.C.’s premier, released an enormous and complex housing plan this past week ahead of the November leadership vote.
Though Eby was once believed to be a shoo-in to capture the province’s top job, Anjali Appadurai officially put her name in the hat on Sept. 29 and now the race is truly on.
Eby’s housing plan has immense promises, some of which include:
$500 million in funding to nonprofits to secure for-sale apartment buildings to prevent renter displacement;
Allowing builders in major urban centres to create three-unit housing on a single-family home plot;
A flipping tax on those attempting to profit off the housing market by buying and quickly selling homes without circumstance (such as death, divorce or job loss) that would expire after two years of ownership;
Provincial legalization of secondary suites;
And setting out a plan for housing delivery in municipalities, with those who exceed their plan to be rewarded with community amenity support and those who don’t to be greeted with provincial intervention to meet demands.
Appadurai welcomed the plan but said it still falls short and that she will share her plan within the coming weeks.
As many of Squamish’s councillor and mayoral candidates have said in interviews with The Squamish Chief, they mostly admit that housing is a federal and provincial responsibility.
Now that we have the basis of one potential plan, what housing promises should we look for from our candidates before voting day?
Candidates need to provide actionable and measurable goals with details of exactly how they will attempt to accomplish those goals.
Vague and evasive answers only skirt responsibility. Only pointing toward federal or provincial powers on housing is timid and wholly unacceptable. The point of elected politicians is to apply pressure and leverage results.
How can voters begin to judge a candidate if they don’t offer transparent goals?
Squamish’s population has grown by over 4,000 since 2016, how many homes — and of what type — do you think we should construct over the next four years?
Vote for candidates that promise to meet those demands.
Yet, Squamish not only needs assurance in the housing market but also in the rental market.
A lot of the current debate centres on the missing middle homes — duplexes, condos, starter homes — but the District is relying on too much good faith in the rental market.
While Eby’s plan to take single-family home plots and allow them to be converted into a three-unit space may seem bold in some parts of B.C., it is commonplace in many neighbourhoods here.
The District has lowered the threshold to create secondary suites and carriage homes in an attempt to bolster the housing availability around town, which is a good tactic in a vacuum.
Yet, the District hopes that new landlords are informing them of their new unit, and are knowledgeable of all the rules in the Residential Tenancy Act and the municipal rules around these units.
In a town where homeowners and renters are all trying to make ends meet, those are some big “asks” of new landlords.
Candidates that care deeply about affordability won’t just speak about homeownership and building out the missing middle, they will make promises to the entire housing spectrum. And principal among these promises must be an assurance that renters aren’t left to fend for themselves.
As we near election day, keep a sharp eye on all the candidates, question their motives and ensure that, at the very least, their promises actually keep everyone in mind.
