CRD Watch Homepage

District of Saanich: “I have determined that while the records concerning the Procurement Law Office may be of interest to you, there is not evidence to indicate this matter has an impact on the wider community.” – The Procurement Law Office’s advice was cited at a council meeting as justification to award senior district staff the ability to award millions in contracts without the approval of elected officials.

By Sasha Izard
Nov 7, 2025


At the Oct 20, 2025 Saanich Committee of the Whole was the following item:

Item D1: PROCUREMENT POLICY AND SIGNING AUTHORITY BYLAW

The staff report attached to the item recommended:

“Specifically, the District Council should delegate to staff the authority to award contracts of any value provided the contract is awarded to the top ranked bidder or proponent through a competitive process that has been conducted in accordance with the procurement policy and applicable procedures and the contract amount is within the approved budget.”

The bolding and italics above were added by myself to provide emphasis on those essential points.

Saanich Council unanimously passed a motion to give senior staff those powers within the schedule allotted that was attached to the agenda item. The schedule (See Appendix 5 at the end of this article), provided powers to various levels of senior staff to award contracts with major amounts of value. The Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) could do so with unlimited value, provided the amount was within Saanich’s budget.

This was covered 2 days later in the Times Colonist: Saanich staff to sign off on procurements without council – Victoria Times Colonist

I wrote a letter in response to the Times Colonist which was published on Oct 28, 2025 (see Appendix 1 at the end of this article).

—————————————————————————————————

During the Committee of the Whole, the Procurement Law Office’s advice was provided as justification for the move.

It was easy to think hearing this that the Procurement Law Office was a college of professionals, or some governmental, or quasi-governmental authority.

On the contrary, a quick Google Search revealed that the officiously sounding Procurement Law Office, is actually a private company that sells advice and other services.

Procurement Office – Procurement Law Office | Procurement Advisory Office

Below: Screen capture (Nov 7, 2025) of the The Procurement Law Office’s website:

The attached staff report to the Oct 20, 2025 Saanich Committee of the Whole agenda item in question wrote about the Procurement Law Office’s input (I’ve added bolding to to the text):

“Procurement Governance

In 2021 due to a backlog in procurement work, a report to the Finance and Governance Standing Committee (F&GSC) noted several steps taken and planned to improve procurement operations and procurement governance at the District. These areas of improvement had been identified and highlighted in an assessment carried out for the District in late 2020 by the Procurement Law Office, a nationally-recognized leader in the field of public procurement.

Staff, with the close support of legal counsel, have worked over the past several years to develop and implement a comprehensive suite of up-to-date documents, practices, and procedures at the operational level. Many of the improvements identified by the Procurement Law Office have been addressed through those efforts and there have been significant benefits realized by the District in both efficiency and flow through.

The remaining items are now being brought forward to Council as they relate primarily to the District’s procurement governance framework. These improvements are aptly summarized in the following passage from the 2021 report to the F&GSC [Saanich’s Finance and Governance Standing Committee], itself quoting from the assessment of the Procurement Law Office:

“Finding – The District’s procurement approval framework does not reflect an
appropriate separation of roles between the District’s elected officials and the District’s administration. The requirement under the Policy that Council approve all contracts with a value greater than $200,000 causes bottlenecks in the approval process and exposes the District to the risk of allegations of inappropriate political influence and interference in the procurement process.

Recommendation – We recommend that the District revise its approval framework to reflect a more appropriate separation of roles between the District’s elected officials and the District’s administration. Specifically, the District Council should delegate to staff the authority to award contracts of any value provided the contract is awarded to the top ranked bidder or proponent through a competitive process that has been conducted in accordance with the procurement policy and applicable procedures and the contract amount is within the approved budget. This would serve to improve efficiency in the contract award process and avoid the appearance of inappropriate political influence and interference in the District’s contracting decisions.”

Does any of this sound familiar?

—————————————————————————————————

On Oct 21, 2025, the day after the item mentioned was passed at Saanich Council, 2025 I sent the following FOI request to the District of Saanich:

Hello,

I’m submitting an FOI request for all communications between the District of Saanich and the Procurement Law Office.

Date range: Jan 1, 2020 to Oct 20, 2025

Thank you,
Sasha Izard

—————————————————————————————————

On Oct 31, 2025 I received Saanich’s fee estimate (See Appendix 2 at the end of this article). Saanich wanted to charge me $136.65 for a very likely heavily censored FOI response.

Saanich’s fee estimate letter can be seen in Appendix 1. at the end of this article.

—————————————————————————————————

I replied the same day:

Hello,

Thank you.  You wrote: “I advise you that an initial review of the responsive records indicates that s. 14 of the Act (solicitor/client privilege) will apply.”

Presumably much of this FOI will be blotted out, so the cost to me for blanked out pages should not be charged for.

I also ask that the fee be fully waived, because it is without a doubt in the public interest for the public to know about the District’s interactions with the Procurement Law Office, because the Procurement Law Office was cited at a recent Council Meeting, as a reason to pass the item, at which it was decided that staff would have power over awarding contracts within the Saanich Budget, instead of the elected officials.  It must be in the public interest to thus know the District’s communications with the Procurement Law Office, if it was cited to justify a major item that shifted vast powers from the elected officials to the staff.

Thank you again,
Sasha Izard

—————————————————————————————————

On Nov 6, 2025 I received a response to my email from the District of Saanich’s Manager of Records and Information Services. The full letter can be read in Appendix 4, at the end of this article.

“Public Interest:

I have reviewed past orders from the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner and have considered the following factors: the subject of the requested records, number of impacted people and whether dissemination of the information in the records would benefit the public District-wide. Media coverage is also a factor for consideration in a request for public interest.

Assessment of Public Interest:

Based on the subject records, I have determined that while the records concerning the Procurement Law Office may be of interest to you, there is no evidence to indicate this matter has an impact on the wider community and you have not provided any evidence of such. I conclude that these records do not meet the threshold of a matter that relates to public interest.”

—————————————————————————————————

On Nov 7, 2025 I sent the following email to Saanich’s Chief Administrative Officer,

Hello Brent Reems,

I ask you as the CAO of Saanich the following question:

Do you agree with the following statement?

“I have determined that while the records concerning the Procurement Law Office may be of interest to you, there is no evidence to indicate this matter
has an impact on the wider community”

In my email to Saanich’s FOI department, I had written:

I also ask that the fee [regarding the FOI concerning records of the Procurement Law Office] be fully waived, because it is without a doubt in the public interest for the public to know about the District’s interactions with the Procurement Law Office, because the Procurement Law Office was cited at a recent Council Meeting, as a reason to pass the item, at which it was decided that staff would have power over awarding contracts within the Saanich Budget, instead of the elected officials.  It must be in the public interest to thus know the District’s communications with the Procurement Law Office, if it was cited to justify a major item that shifted vast powers from the elected officials to the staff.

Thank you.
I look forward to your answer,
Sasha Izard

—————————————————————————————————

I then received a response from Saanich’s Corporate Officer:

Sasha,

Thank you for your note regarding your Fee Waiver request.  The CAO is not privy to actions of the FOI Office.  The Corporate Officer is deemed the Head of FOI as per the Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act and the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY BYLAW, 2015, NO. 9369.

I can confirm that the FOI team has responded to your request for fee waiver based on the legislation.  You will note that the letter states there is an opportunity for you to have the OIPC of BC review Saanich’s response. 

There will be no further communication on the statements noted below.

Angila

Angila Bains

Director, Legislative & Protective Services

Corporate Officer

District of Saanich

—————————————————————————————————


Conclusion:

If free and full documentation of The Procurement Law Office’s advice to the District, as it was originally sent is not in the public interest, as Saanich’s FOI department has made clear, then where is the transparency around the process/justification brought forward by staff to award sweeping procurement powers from the elected officials to unelected senior staffers?

The Procurement Law Office is not a public body, but is a private organization that sells advice to public bodies. Did the District of Saanich pay for the advice that the elected officials should hand over procurement powers to staff within the limits of the budget? If they did, they would have done so using public money.

If so, why will the District not release that information? If it does release that information for well over $100 without any guarantee of the information actually being released, as the District suggested it will draw on Section.14 Solicitor/Client Privilege under FOIPPA, which will likely keep much of the information behind a wall of censorship.

This utter lack of transparency around this process and the advice it was based on, having originated from a private company selling advice, demonstrates fully in my view why this vast shift of power from elected to unelected officials should never have taken place in a so-called democracy.

As the awarding of such contracts are now under the jurisdiction of the senior staffers, the items regarding the awarding of such contracts will no longer come before council, and thus like waived public hearings will be yet another example of the massive rollback against public input on decision-making in a so-called democracy. If the Procurement Law Office had anything to say about that to the District, we will likely never have the opportunity to see it.

—————————————————————————————————

A sequel to this article can be read here:

The District of Saanich is hiding how much it paid the Procurement Law Office behind solicitor client privilege. – CRD Watch Homepage

—————————————————————————————————

Appendix 1: Saanich’s Fee Estimate Letter for FOI 2025-221

—————————————————————————————————

Appendix 2: “More accountability is needed in Saanich” (Oct 28, 2025 letter published in the Times Colonist)

Re: “Saanich staff now able to sign off on procurements without council’s OK,” Oct. 22.

Under the new policy, that council has given the initial go-ahead for, unelected directors can approve up to $5 million in contract awards, and the chief administrative officer is able to approve above that number.

Only the budget is the limit.

For reference, Saanich’s annual budget is in the hundreds of millions. In addition, if passed, the CAO can offer similarly unchecked millions more in contract amendments without the approval of elected officials.

With Saanich’s taxes and utilities an unsustainable runaway train, and the debt skyrocketing towards hundreds of millions of dollars, this is no idle matter.

Yet the elected officials are unanimously throwing away their democratic oversight and control of contract procurement.

The same staff that wants practically unchecked power over procurement spending has no issue increasing ­building heights to 24 storeys in the Quadra McKenzie Plan, despite the public making it clear that 18 storeys was far too high.

The same staff, less than a week after getting initial approval for their practically unfettered new powers over procurement, want a “town hall meeting” where the public can’t address the ­council as a unified whole.

Saanich needs fiscal responsibility, accountability, transparency, and democracy, yet we are losing all of these at an alarming rate.

Sasha Izard

Saanich

Bus passes for seniors; great hospital care – Victoria Times Colonist

—————————————————————————————————

Appendix 3: My presentation to Saanich Council regarding this item, at the Committee of the Whole on Oct 20, 2025:

Item D1: PROCUREMENT POLICY AND SIGNING AUTHORITY BYLAW

Quoting from the Staff Report’s recommendation: “Specifically, the District Council should delegate to staff the authority to award contracts of any value provided the contract is awarded to the top ranked bidder or proponent through a competitive process that has been conducted in accordance with the procurement policy and applicable procedures and the contract amount is within the approved budget.”

This is an outrage.  This is nothing, but a complete attempted power grab over the contract procurement process.

While it may be true that staff is more competent in dealing with contracts, than the current set of elected officials; giving the staff the equivalent of a blank chequebook, as long as it is within Saanich’s massive and ever-growing budget is completely unacceptable.

The report, which seeks to justify this situation, mentions, achieving quote: “an effective balance between accountability and efficiency;”

There will be no accountability if this is passed.  There will be no public input before council on the awarding of such contracts.  If this is passed, these items will cease to come before council, and thus, before democratic public scrutiny and input.

This is throwing out democracy in the name of efficiency, to keep the proverbial trains running on time, or as I prefer in this instance, the cranes running on industry’s preferred schedule. Appendix 3, includes that among methods of disposition of a surplus asset: “sale at market value to an employee with the consent of the director responsible for the asset and the Director of Finance.”

Allowing this as policy, would be nothing other than the allowing of conflict of interest.

On July of 2023, I emailed Saanich’s CAO asking for the District’s conflict of interest rules regarding contractors.

Included in his response he wrote: “Whether a conflict exists is determined by staff responsible for managing the contract (in consultation with supports, such as the municipal solicitors).”

I then asked for a copy of laws, and bylaws, regarding conflict of interest rules regarding contractual relationships.

The CAO responded: “There are no bylaws/laws (in terms of legislation) with regard to third party contractor relationships.”                
Apparently, it’s the wild west.

Last year, council voted to delegate authority for the approval to award the 2024 civil engineering construction tenders to the CAO authorizing that he be able to award contracts amounting to a sliver under 50 million dollars.

I made an FOI to seek the source of the justification for this in the staff report for that item: quote “in 2021 a Request for Information was issued to the construction industry inquiring about current market conditions and what actions Saanich could take to achieve the successful outcome for the tenders and projects.”  The report continued: “The delegation of approval to the Chief Administrative Officer will accomplish this objective”

Delegations of power from elected officials to staff, serves industry’s interests, not the public’s.

In the FOI response, the input from the construction industry was censored entirely under Section 21 – “Disclosure harmful to business interests of a third party.” 

Nonsense.There is no transparency, and there is no accountability, when business is conducted by staff behind closed doors with industry, without the control and oversight of elected officials and the public.

If council now passes this item, this will be nothing, but the abdication of your responsibilities as elected officials to uphold public accountability, democracy and transparency in regard to the determination of publicly awarded contracts.

I’d call you rubber stamps, but if you allow this to be passed, you will even be giving away your ability to be rubber stamps! 

Thank you.

—————————————————————————————————

Appendix 4: Letter by the District of Saanich’s Manager of Records and Information Services denying that the release of records concerning The Procurement Law Office is in the public interest.

—————————————————————————————————


Appendix 5: Schedule C “Authorization Schedule” from “The Procurement Manual” from Attachment 1 on the agenda for this item for the Saanich Oct 20, 2025 Committee of the Whole.

————————————————————————————————–

See also:

Index of articles regarding Law and Bylaw – CRD Watch Homepage

Index of Exorbitant Cost Estimates Provided for Freedom of Information in British Columbia – CRD Watch Homepage

Index of articles and letters regarding the reduction of public input in the District of Saanich. – CRD Watch Homepage