THE PITCH SOUNDED GOOD...

The vision was simple and,

honestly, not wrong in principle.

I support it with the right mechanisms and oversight in place - not just the endorsement of a single slate - the majority.

Langley Township had been under built for some time. 

Roads have been crumbling. Fire halls were overdue. Parks were unfinished

Thousands of new residents were moving in every year; all bringing real demand for real infrastructure.

THE PLAN?

Make growth pay for growth. That's what they say...

Borrow at competitive rates to build now, before costs doubled

Recover the money from developers as new homes were approved. 

Pay it off systematically. 

Leave Langley better than you found it. 

Sounds like progress to me.

It's a defensible strategy. 

Many municipalities do exactly that. 

And done right, with oversight & transparency it works.

But that's not what's happend.

And the gap between what was promised ...

AND WHAT THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SHOW

is significant, documented,  and WILL most likely be landing on our property tax bills.

WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED?

HERE ARE THE NUMBERS

The Township's own audited financial statements tell the story directly:

TOTAL DEBT - YEAR BY YEAR

Year Total Debt

2022 $177 million

2023 $167 million

2024 $317 million

2025 $584 million

2026 (authorized) $620 million+

In three years, debt went from $177 million to $584 million. 

That is a 230% increase in four years. 

The fastest debt accumulation in the Township's history, happening simultaneously across multiple projects with insufficient public scrutiny of any of them.

That is not "borrowing strategically to build. 

That's living off the credit card to cover the monthly shortfall.

For context: 

The Township's own adopted 2026 five-year financial plan shows increasing annual debt payments rising from $53 million in 2026 to $74 million by 2030. 

That money goes to lenders,  every year,

before a single road gets paved (175 KMs of them) ,

a single firefighter gets paid, or a single park gets mowed.

The TOL’s Aggressive CAC Policy COLLAPSED the plan IN COURT

The entire growth-pays-for-growth model rests primarily on one mechanism: 

Developers pay a fee when they get rezoning approval. 

The Township called these Community Amenity Contributions. 

In practice, they were treated as mandatory , a condition of getting your project approved.

The Township didn't just have an aggressive developer contribution policy; it changed the rules mid-game. 

On June 10, 2024, council introduced a brand new $550,000/acre rate for Employment and Business Park lands - a category with the CAC schedule that previously had no rate at all and applied it directly to Lorval's in-stream application… TOL changed the agreement by $39 million dollars.

That was already after the company had already spent $190M acquiring land, $26M on site prep, and cleared third reading of their rezoning bylaw. 

BC Supreme Court struck it down as exactly what it was: an unlawful condition imposed after the game had already started.

That was not a little financial set back and the resulting consequences were immediate and severe.

 Approximately 50 development projects that were expected to contribute to repaying the arena debt are now legally voluntary payers. Nobody can force them to pay.

The first known result: one 39-storey tower offered $5.1 million instead of the $10.2 million the Township expected. Half. And that negotiation happened before the developer even knew how weak the Township's position was.

$144 million in lost CAC funding, built assuming developer contributions would cover it , 

was stripped from the new ACC fee framework entirely, because provincial rules don’t allow charging new development for costs already incurred. 

That $144 million gap in funding now has no confirmed source of repayment.

The old CAC policy has been replaced with the new provincially approved & transparent ACC fee system, which is legally sound, transparent for all - with proper accountability mechanisms mandated. The 50 projects remaining in stream with the old CAC policy before the TOL finally adopted the ACC bylaw - will undoubtably be voluntarily offering less in CAC's - which will further increase the funding gap for planned community amenities.

The new ACC program - similar in respects - it provides the needed clarity, transparency and ammenity planning - but it collects revenue slowly over 30 years (not the typical 25 years as would be the norm - this was a TOL amendment) … and as new permits are issued.

Extending the amortization of the ACC from 25-30 years, while keeping the cost down - certainly adds more economic uncertainty to the program. 

Another decision that doesn’t appear to have been a transparent one. 

So - There was an aggressive capital project schedule - and the revenue to support it was needed.  The TOL saw the opportunity - a potential $39 million windfall and brought in a CAC fee amendment to capture it.   The court didn’t agree.

It was the result of moving too fast, with too much confidence, and too little independent scrutiny.

THE HOUSING TRUST DEBT - THE LOAN THAT BYPASSED PROCESS

Inside that $584 million debt figure is approximately $177 million borrowed through the Langley Township Housing Trust Society; a subsidiary organization of the Township. - Langley Facilities Society (as per the Audited Statements) - not the Township directly.

Here is what did not happen before that $177M was borrowed:

•     No loan authorization bylaw was passed

•     No Alternative Approval Process was held ; which gives the public the right to trigger a referendum on major borrowing 

•     The debt did not appear in the Township's financial plans until early 2026

It only surfaced publicly after a formal complaint was filed with the Municipal Auditor under Section 172 of the Community Charter - Thank you Mike Parker. 

BC law exists specifically to ensure that major public borrowing goes through a transparent, democratic process before it happens NOT AFTER. That process was not followed. 

The Township now carries $177 million in debt that bypassed the oversight mechanisms - designed to protect you.

THE WILLOUGHBY COMMUNITY CENTRE & WHY THE MATH DOESN'T WORK RIGHT NOW

If you live in Willoughby, you have waited 15 to 20 years for a community centre.

That wait is real, the frustration is legitimate, and nobody who understands the growth this community absorbed should dismiss it.

But here is the honest fiscal picture as of today:

The plan described in the Mayor's video - use development revenue to buy the school land, relocate the school, build the community centre;  

relied on the exact same CAC funding mechanism that was struck down in court, 

produced a $144 million unresolved debt, and now uses the ACC fee system that collects revenue slowly over 30 years.

The Willowbrook Community Centre - which sits ahead of Willoughby in the queue; is estimated at $250 million alone. 

No cost has been published for Willoughby's centre.

No timeline. No financing plan. No operating cost estimate.

The Township currently has:

•     Approximately $11 million in formal borrowing room remaining

•     Reserves dropping from $359 million to $108 million in 2026

•     $53–74 million in annual debt payments consuming the budget through 2030

•     The $144M is an unrecovered CAC revenue a gap in the Township's growth-pays model with no confirmed replacement plan. 

  
  

The community centre is in the plan. 

The money to build it and critically to operate it responsibly - missing. 

And if the arena is any precedent, without confirmed funding, and without a maintenance reserve produces a facility that costs taxpayers millions a year as an reasonable estimate.

No pool, community centre, Dry/Ice rinks, soccer facility, performing arts centre - none of them operate at a level that is break even. They each operate subsidized by the municipality.

That cost is payed through property taxes.

Each of these facilities will have several million dollar operating costs. Of course as much as possible needs to improve ROI - but the long term reality is for each capital project - its not just the capital costs and debt that is added - but the long term annual operating costs and maintenance that comes with them.

Willoughby deserves a community centre. 

It also deserves an honest answer about when it can actually be built, 

what it will cost to run, and who is going to pay for it - before the first shovel goes in the ground.

WHAT’S BEEN SAID - AND WHAT THE RECORD SHOWS

"Revenues from growth are now up to $100 million per year." 

-Mayor Woodward -   Progress for Langley video “Capital Debt for Capital Projects”

The audited record shows:

    2023: $78.1 million

    2024: $79.0 million

    2025: $72.7 million

Growth revenues are declining - not reaching $100 million. 

And post-court ruling, the portion that was legally forced is now legally voluntary and already showing a decline. 

"60% of debt is designed to be paid off in less than 20 years." 

-Mayor Woodward - Progress for Langley video “Capital Debt for Capital Projects”

The adopted 2026 five-year financial plan shows debt payments rising every single year through 2030; from $53 million to $74 million annually. 

60% of the Debt that is designed to be paid off quickly - should result with falling payment schedules. 

This one is rising. 

No project-by-project payoff schedule has been published publicly. There needs to be one - for each project. 

"The 23% property tax increase is fear mongering - it was never going to happen." 

-Mayor Woodward -   Progress for Langley Video “The Budget 2023-2026

Township of Langley Five-Year Financial Plan Bylaw 6207- 

Its a legally adopted bylaw, passed by Council in June 2026 

It shows property tax and levy revenue rising from $216 million in 2026 to $265 million in 2027. 

That is a 22.6% increase embedded in the Township's own planning document.

That number did’t  come from any critics first, or social media. 

It came from a bylaw that a majority of Council voted to adopt. 

Calling it a fear mongering or dismissing it while it sits in a council-adopted document is a misrepresentation and if that isn't to be taken seriously - it has no business being in the plan.

The public needs to trust what's being presented, so that Council can be held accountable to what's agreed.

"We paid off the LEC debt — five years early." 

-Mayor Woodward -  Progress for Langley Video -“Capital Debt for Capital Projects”

True - but incomplete. 

The original Events Centre debt was retired. 

But TOTAL Township debt went from $177 million to $584 million in the same period. 

Paying off one loan while taking on $407 million in new debt is not debt reduction. 

It is debt replacement at a scale five times larger - with no clear plan - no debt reduction schedule - with NO DEBT POLICY in place.

THIS IS WHERE SLATE GOVERNANCE CAN LEAD

Every decision reviewed in this analysis was made by a council where five members vote together, consistently, on every major financial commitment. 

A minority - independent voice. 

No meaningful dissent or scrutiny, with the ability for the Council majority to fast track decisions.  

The result is not unique to Langley. 

It is what happens when a governing group moves fast, 

governs with confidence rather than scrutiny, 

and treats opposition as obstruction rather than accountability.

The vision was not wrong or bad. 

I quite support aspects of it. 

The execution - the speed, the shortcuts, 

the absence of evident plans,  

debt taken on without proper authorization, the lack of scrutiny and accountability to proper governance , the CAC policy that was pushed until a court stopped it;

that is what produced this outcome.

And now the fiscal capacity to deliver the remaining vision - and even more progress for 

Willoughby, Brookswood, Aldergrove, Willowbrook is severely constrained by the cost of getting here.

THE BOTTOM LINE

This is where the Township of Langley stands, in plain numbers, from its own audited statements and adopted bylaws:

•     $584 million in debt — up from $177 million four years ago

•     $334M in newly authorized 2026 borrowing, on top of the existing $584M,     pushing us well past $900 million if fully drawn.

•     $177 million borrowed without proper public authorization

•     Reserves dropping by $251 million in a single year - now sitting around $106 Million

•     A new Amenity Fee structure that pushes out repayment costs 30 years instead of 25 

•     22.6% property tax increase embedded in the adopted 2027 plan

•     $11 million left in remaining borrowing room against four unbuilt community centres

THIS IS YOUR TOWNSHIP. THESE ARE OUR BILLS.

Now - nobody handed you a ballot for the arena.

Nobody asked you about the Housing Trust loan either. 

The vision was sold as progress for Langley

The audited record shows the cost of confidence without accountability.

Langley Township deserves the community centres, the roads, the fire halls, and the parks -

I’d love to see an expansion of the Yorkson Creek Community Park. 

I’d a traded one indoor soccer training facility for 4 or 5 more of those parks.

But you deserve a council that builds them with your approval and understanding. 

The next election - Oct 17th - 

You’ll have your chance -

It’s your very own, Alternative Approval Process.

Use it.