Screened as a public body · 5 yearly totals · 2023–2025

District of Saanich

Printed asDistrict of SaanichDistrict Of Saanich

Two public bodies disclosed paying this name a combined $68,935,784.23 over three fiscal years.

$68.9M

from 2 public bodies over 3 fiscal years · #1 of 2,251 names by total disclosed

Who paid, and when

Each cell is one body’s yearly total for this name. Darker means more.

’232023’242024’252025

CRD$14.01Mdisclosed$2.19Mdisclosed$51.84Mlarge share

Victoria$250Kdisclosed—not in schedule$652Kdisclosed

Schedule held, name not in itNo schedule held — a coverage gap, not zero

Disclosed to this name, by public body and fiscal year
Public body	2023	2024	2025
Capital Regional District	$14,007,424	$2,188,903	$51,837,084
City of Victoria	$250,000	Not in the schedule	$652,373.23

By year, all bodies

Stacked by payer.

2023$14,257,424

2024$2,188,903

2025$52,489,457.23

CRDVictoria

Every disclosed amount

One line per body and year, exactly as published. Each source link opens the official document at the page.

Download these 5 rows (CSV)

Capital Regional District · 20252025$51,837,084District Of Saanich2025 schedule, p. 66 · line 187

Capital Regional District · 20242024$2,188,903District of Saanich2024 schedule, p. 66 · line 166

Capital Regional District · 20232023$14,007,424District of Saanich2023 schedule, p. 68 · line 148

City of Victoria · 20252025$652,373.23District Of Saanich2025 schedule, row 119

City of Victoria · 20232023$250,000District Of Saanich2023 schedule, row 113

All amounts in Canadian dollars. A year with no line means the name wasn’t in that schedule, or the schedule isn’t held here — not that the body paid nothing.

A line here doesn’t match its source? Report a correction →

Notices for this name

Automated screens. Each is a question to investigate, not a finding.

Paid by several bodiesIn review · no human sign-off

$68,935,784.23 across the schedules that print this exact name

Question to ask: Do more than one public body disclose this same exact-name label, and is it one legal entity or two? (An exact-name overlap is not an entity resolution.)
What it does not prove: It does not establish that the label is one legal entity. This is an exact-name overlap only; entity resolution, ownership, competition, or legal conclusions require separate source-backed evidence.

Public-body recipientIn review · no human sign-off

A candidate intergovernmental screen. It is left out of “top supplier” lists and the commercial concentration measure.

Question to ask: Is this large recipient a public body / remitter / utility / P3 entity / intergovernmental flow rather than a commercial supplier?
What it does not prove: A public-body / remitter / utility classification is a candidate screen, not a legal finding about a supplier or a competition outcome. It does not mean the flow was non-commercial or exempt from procurement rules.

Year-over-year jumpIn review · no human sign-off

CRD: $2.19M → $51.84M (2024→25)CRD: $14.01M → $2.19M (2023→24)

Question to ask: Does the year-over-year change reflect a new or terminating relationship, or a re-classification or one-off, and what (if any) project or contract evidence explains it?
What it does not prove: A year-over-year change in a disclosed aggregate amount is not evidence of a new contract, a non-competitive award, or wrongdoing. Timing and context require project, contract, or council-record evidence.

Large yearly totalIn review · no human sign-off

CRD 2025: $51,837,084 CRD 2023: $14,007,424

Question to ask: For a large disclosed aggregate, is the label one supplier or several, and for an 'In Trust' payee who is the actual client or beneficial recipient?
What it does not prove: This is an annual aggregate disclosed amount, not an invoice, contract, transaction count, beneficial-owner attribution, or procurement finding. For an 'In Trust' / intermediary payee it does not show the client or beneficial recipient.