Renting, ownership, and a future on Salt Spring
We received this question on Facebook. The reader’s name has been omitted.
The question
The reader asks how Salt Spring can provide permanent, affordable homes and paths to ownership alongside rentals. They suggest land trusts, co-ops, rent-to-own, shared ownership, and homes above shops in Ganges.
Read the full Facebook question
Ethan, it’s not only about affordable housing. We need long term, permanent homes that actually empower people + families.
We need to reinvent home ownership.
Many people on this island have spent, or still spend, approximately $2,500–$3,000 per month on rent. That is a bloody mortgage payment.
Yet when a struggling family wants to own a home, suddenly the answer is: you need a massive down payment, you need to qualify under the "banks" rules, you pay interest + fees for decades, and if you want to pay off the freakin mortgage early, you face a penalty.
If that isn't usury 101, I don't know what is!
I've rented on Salt Spring since 2008. Over 18 years, that's over 540K gone toward housing. Yet the usury based banks don't meaningfully look at 18 years of rent being paid on time every month and say: "this person has already demonstrated an ability to pay for housing."
So yes, affordable rentals are important but, why should renting forever be the only affordable option?
We need to move away from complete dependence on banks + conventional mortgages, or work alongside them to reinvent the system.
Why not community land trusts where the community owns the land + families own the homes?
Why not rent-to-own or rent-to-equity housing where part of every month's payment builds equity?
Why not limited-equity cooperatives?
Why not shared ownership between residents, nonprofits + community housing organizations?
Why not long term land leases that dramatically reduce the upfront cost of owning the home?
Why can't someone's documented history of paying $2,500 a month in rent for years count toward an alternative path to ownership?
Why aren't we looking much more seriously at mixed-use development in places that are already commercial?
I've always imagined a mini-condo/mixed-use development in Ganges above Gasoline Alley + the shops surrounding the parking lot through toward Salt Spring Coffee. Businesses below, homes above with a much needed long overdue face lift but, that's another conversation.
Walk to work. Walk to the grocery store. Walk for coffee. Walk to services. Less dependence on cars. More people actually living in the village instead of pushing development farther and farther outward.
Obviously water, sewage, environmental protection, infrastructure and First Nations engagement have to be dealt with properly.
But freakin imagine something different.
Because if our answer to the housing crisis is simply finding ways for people to keep paying rent for another 20 or 30 years, we haven't changed the system. We've just found another way to keep people inside it.
Affordable housing matters.
But so does ownership, equity, permanence and giving ordinary people something to show for decades of paying for the roof over their heads.
Do we genuinely want systemic change, or are we merely willing to preserve a system that continues to exploit people while people blindly get used left, right and centre?
My answer
I’m glad you wrote. I share your frustration with how little has changed. I want us to make more long-term rentals possible at rents people can afford, and I’m absolutely open to reimagining what homeownership could look like for more people. We need to work on both. In the near term, let me explain what I could bring forward as a trustee. This is a longer post, so bear with me.
Salt Spring isn’t a municipality, so our powers over housing are more limited. The LTC can help through planning and zoning decisions and housing agreements. I want it to remove unnecessary obstacles, make the requirements clear, and work with people trying to provide homes. I can’t change mortgage qualification rules or promise funding and water connections, but there are specific things I could bring to the committee:
Get Bylaw 537 back for a decision
I support allowing more accessory homes on suitable properties. That could mean a rental cottage, somewhere for adult children, or a smaller home for a senior who wants to rent out the main house. I could bring forward a motion asking staff to identify the remaining issues, set out the work needed with Tsawout, Penelakut, and other affected Nations, and provide a schedule for bringing the bylaw back. We need a workable version passed.
Make affordability agreements useful to renters and workable for owners
We need long-term rentals people can afford, including apartments and cottages. Allowing them to be built doesn’t make the rent affordable. But requiring a low rent without working out how the owner can build and maintain the home won’t help either. I could ask the committee to have staff prepare options for securing affordable long-term rentals through housing agreements, including an ADU option linked to suitable incentives or additional development rights. Those agreements would need to spell out the rent, increases, duration, and who checks compliance, including what happens when the property sells or the tenant changes. We also need room for family housing and seniors downsizing, without pretending every ADU serves the same purpose.
Make room for other forms of ownership, too
I support land trusts, co-ops, and shared ownership, and I’m open to working through the rent-to-own and rent-to-equity ideas you’ve raised. We’d need to understand what residents would own, what they would pay, and what happens if they need to leave. Bylaw 537 wouldn’t let someone buy a cottage separately from the main house, so it doesn’t answer that part of your question. I could ask the committee to direct staff to identify where our planning and zoning rules obstruct alternative housing arrangements and prepare the necessary changes, with a deadline to report back. That work could include homes above shops in Ganges, both to rent and to buy. For the location you mentioned, we’d need the owners involved and a clear account of what the site and services can support.
Work through the costs and approvals with the people involved
I could help bring renters, housing providers, owners, the CRD, and relevant service providers together around actual proposals. We need to know what construction will cost, what residents would pay, what financing is available, and which approvals remain outstanding. My role would be to help resolve the land-use issues, pursue decisions before the LTC, and work with the other agencies on their parts. People should get clear answers about what is required and when to expect a decision.
Tell people what has happened
I could publish quarterly updates on what I’ve brought forward, what the committee has decided, and what remains unfinished. I could also ask for reporting on completed and occupied homes, including rents in the affordable-housing program. An approval matters, but you should be able to see whether it resulted in somewhere people can actually live. As you know, I’ve already started building tools like explore.saltspring.info. I will continue building on these tools so people can follow housing and rental proposals, see the timelines, and know who is responsible for the next step. I can build those tools myself, and I want to make them available to everyone.
These are some of the things I think would help, and I’d be happy to sit down with you and talk through the proposals you’ve raised. I’d also want other renters involved so we can understand what kinds of homes people need, what they can afford, and which arrangements would work for them. I’m open to new ideas as we work out a plan together, with clear steps and who needs to do what.
And yes, I want systemic change in housing. The current system isn’t working for many people. We need to change it and move forward with viable and reasonable plans. The time for letting good ideas get buried in proposal hell is over.