City of Powell River Council has altered the wording in its strategic priorities document related to a possible name change for the city.
Before a full gallery in chambers on February 15, council, under a new business item, had a motion from councillor Cindy Elliott to make the change.
In the city’s draft strategic priorities document, under intergovernmental relations, there was an item that read: Consult city residents and hold the equivalent of a referendum to ask, do you support a name change for the City of Powell River at the 2026 municipal election?
Councillor Rob Southcott brought forward a motion to rescind the intergovernmental relations item.
“My reason for moving this and my reason for supporting this is that the word referendum, I believe to be confusing, because it is no longer a word that is used officially in government language,” said Southcott. “It doesn’t convey what we would be able to do, so I don’t believe the original language that we used really does convey our intentions clearly. If my motion to rescind passes, I believe councillor [Cindy] Elliott has a motion for alternative language to move.”
Elliott said council admits that the meeting of January 30 on the strategic priorities was very long. She said she chaired the meeting and some of the language was proposed on the fly.
“We didn’t have an awful lot of time to think about it,” said Elliott. “I don’t believe I had adequate opportunity to express how important it is to ensure the polls or votes that we have are structured in such a way that they are following principles of good governance. We should not be putting language in our strategic priorities that is not reflective of what we can legally do. We can’t legally have a referendum.
“I’m in favour or rescinding the motion and trying to get the words right.”
Mayor Ron Woznow said he was opposed to the motion to rescind. He said councillors debated the issue at the January 30 meeting. He said his motion to have a vote equivalent to a referendum be held at the next general election on the question: do you want to change the name of Powell River? was passed. He said Elliott proposed an amendment to change it and that was defeated.
“This motion is another attempt to amend my motion, which was passed,” said Woznow. “The motion would bring significant uncertainty as to how, when, where and who would get to voice their opinions. The words, equivalent to a referendum, are very concise and clear.”
Woznow said the city can hold a referendum in the same way as it did with the library. He said the term equivalent to a referendum makes it specific that it will meet the requirements of the provincial government, which is that there will be consultation, and hearing from the electorate, what their thoughts are.
“We have discussed this at length,” said Woznow. “There have been amendments that were defeated. It is time to move on.”
After lengthy discussion, council carried the motion to rescind the original draft strategic plan item with the equivalent to a referendum reference. The motion passed by a four to three margin, with Elliott, Southcott, and councillors Trina Isakson and Earl Almeida in favour, and Woznow and councillors George Doubt and Jim Palm opposed.
Council then considered the alternate motion from Elliott, which read: Take substantive steps toward reconciliation with Tla’amin Nation by engaging the public on the topic of a name change, including a possible new name, leading up to a public opinion poll timed with the 2026 municipal election.
Elliott said when a question is put before the public with a yes or no vote, if the public votes for a name change, there is no clear direction.
“The public doesn’t know what a yes vote stands for,” said Elliott.
She said it is important for the public to understand what the change will be. She advocated for a name to be part of the public opinion polling process, and that people know what they are voting yes for.
Elliott’s motion passed, with Woznow and Palm opposed.
Council then discussed its draft strategic priorities 2024 to 2026 document with the intention of adopting it as amended with the revised intergovernmental relations item regarding the name change.
Doubt said it had taken a while for council to arrive at the vote. He said he’d like to vote in favour of it, give it to staff, so when they are writing reports, that strategic priorities can be taken into account.
Palm said council did not have a strategic plan, or objectives with timelines, plus staff responsibilities. He said those are all components that should all be in a strategic plan.
Council, however, adopted its strategic priorities document.
Tla'amin response
Tla’amin Nation, which originally advocated that the city change its name to get rid of Powell, has weighed in on council’s decisions.
In a post on its website, Tla’amin stated that it remains grateful for the strong community support to remove the harmful name Powell from the community. Tla’amin doesn’t support opinion polls or referenda because the human rights of a minority should not be decided by a majority, the statement read.
"Put another way, should individuals who are for the most part unaffected by, or have materially benefitted from, the legacy of Powell determine if his actions caused harm to Indigenous people?" the statement continued. "When Powell River was named, Tla’amin people couldn’t vote and were considered wards of the state. To engage an opinion poll fundamentally questions the path of reconciliation and would create more division regardless of the outcome of that poll."
The Joint Working Group Report recommendation 11 states that opinion polls or referendum should only be considered as an action of last resort to be contemplated only after the other 10 recommendations have been implemented.
"Taken together, the other 10 recommendations provide a clear and cooperative path forward - including striking a reconciliation committee and delegating staff to implement these vital and constructive steps to reconciliation," the Tla'amin notice stated. "Jumping to recommendation 11 without addressing the other 10 recommendations is sure to result in an uninformed and negative process that will harm relationships in our community.
"There is no legal requirement for an opinion poll or referendum, and we urge city council and city residents to consider a less divisive process and make serious progress on the name change.”
Join the Peak's email list for the top headlines right in your inbox Monday to Friday.
