Council – March 30 2020

Posted on April 1, 2020. by Patrick Johnstone. 3 Comments.

We had a most unusual Council Meeting on Monday. An emergency meeting just to get Council caught up on the various actions the City is taking to the pandemic situation. We did not meet in Council Chambers, but did a video conference. For technical and modesty reasons, the video conference was not recorded as video, though an audio recording was made for the record. So you can’t watch the meeting, but you can read the agenda and listen to the audio here, if you are so inclined. The audio isn’t great, and we were all working it out as we went along, but it is there for the record.

There were two agenda items, both framed around the Working Groups developed in City Hall to get us through this unprecedented situation.

COVID-19 Pandemic Response – Action Items from the 7 Working Groups Seeking Council Approval
The City has (as previously reported) put together 7 working groups to manage aspects of our pandemic response. The reporting structure right now will be for them to update Council in these meetings, and more specifically ask for direction or approval if and when needed, for actions they are proposing.

This week, there were two Working Groups asking for specific direction:

Business and Working Economy:
With many businesses closed, there is some concern about lack of eyes on the street and resultant heightened security concerns. There is a call here for more on-street police patrols, or a change in patrol patterns, perhaps some redeployment of City Staff such as parks operations or engineering operations staff who are otherwise undertasked to provide extra eyes, or helping coordinate private security operations if needed. The Working Group is going to work with the BIAs and neighborhood business groups to develop this idea, and come back to Council if there is a funding request attached.

Some discussion arose here about other aspects of policing that are deserving of extra attention at the time when people are housebound and under increased stress, including domestic violence and power-based crimes. We need to be clear here that Council does not direct police in their operation, but we are able to allocate further resources if needed to achieve community goals.

The Working Group is also establishing a sub-group to look into supporting the arts/culture sector, and how the City can best support them. The impact of this crisis on not-for-profits is similar to that on small businesses, even if they have fewer tools to call attention to the issue.

Education and Enforcement:
The provincial government is issuing variety of orders to protect public health, and are asking local governments for help to enforce them. This is, of course, an expanding demand on City resources. We can hire some extra staff trained in this type of work, and potentially be reimbursed through the provincial emergency funding program.

It is hard to hire enforcement staff in a hurry. Becoming a Bylaw Officer requires specific training courses such as those offered through the Justice Institute, as there is a fair amount of complex interacting legislation and enforcement powers, so getting a bunch of them on-board in a short period of time (when every other City is no doubt in the same situation) will be challenging.

However, a big part of progressive enforcement is education and responding to concerns, and there are likely a bigger pool of folks who have experience being in “public facing” jobs at the City, and have training and knowledge of what the City does and how it operates. Some of them are not able to do their regular jobs – recreation program staff, library staff, lifeguards, etc. – so we may have more luck on-boarding these folks with less training and preparation required.

However, when education shifts to enforcement, we are going to need some expanded local Bylaw powers and ticketing/fines to make enforcement possible. That requires edits to a couple of our Bylaws. This will be addressed in upcoming meetings, and I hope we can see significant fines for serious offenders of those violating the rules for profit, and smaller fines/tickets for those doing it through simple stubbornness.

Finally, the City has established a single contact number if people have questions about the restrictions, supports, or anything related to our local response to the pandemic emergency. This will make it easier for City staff to track complaints, concerns, and inquiries, and will allow you to have a tracking number for your concern to make it easier to follow up.

That number is 604-636-4343 or you can e-mail
covidcompliance@newwestcity.ca

COVID-19 Pandemic Response – Update and Progress from the 7 Working Groups
These reports are simply the working groups reporting out, and if you are interested in the breadth of work the City is doing, you can read them in the on-line agenda.

And there is always the City’s website dedicated to the response which you can find here.

Finally, a bit of a programming report.

I am having a hard time finding non-Pandemic things to blog about, because things that I am usually jawing on about seem out of context right now. I also don’t feel as great talking about the bigger COVID-19 thing outside of the City’s response, because I there is already too much information out there, and too many non-definitive information sources (like this), and I would rather people pay attention to Public Health officials and senior government information channels right now. I’m not sure I have anything useful to add.

This is a really shitty time. Like many of you, I am constantly bouncing between anxiety, hopelessness, and glimmers of joy when I see the positive work communities are doing to hold things together. I just want this to be over, but recognize it isn’t going to be over any time soon. I want to do something to make it better, but recognize there is not a lot I can do, and that sitting at home straining to concentrate on my work is actually the best thing I can do right now.

I’ll probably get around to writing a few things here about what it means to be in this job at a time like this, but I’m not sure I can handle that emotional labour right now. Like the rest of Council, I am hearing from residents, from businesses, and from friends; this thing is hitting a lot of people really hard. The only thing we all share is uncertainty, and that is causing a lot of anxiety. A bit of respite is found in seeing the great work that staff in the City is doing in completely uncertain times, doing things they were not trained to do, and demonstrating great perseverance when they are just as stressed and anxious as the rest of us.

People pulling together – even when they keep their distance – is going to be the key to recovery here. Stay safe, folks.

Council – March 23 2020

Posted on March 26, 2020. by Patrick Johnstone. 3 Comments.

We held a special Council meeting on Monday, and I’m sorry I’m so late getting this out. It was recorded on video, despite the slightly-strange chambers set-up to accommodate social distancing, you should be able to follow along with the conversation that occurred. Also note that Monday was a year ago with the pace of change here, so some of the below is updated, some is not. Any discrepancy between the following and today’s reality is likely a product of that lag.

There is one question you may have about why we were physically meeting at all, considering that some participants were able to call in. Short version is that the Community Charter and our Procedure Bylaw require us to have a physical quorum (at least 4 voting members) in the Chambers for it to be a legally constituted meeting, but we will fix that with the first item on the Agenda.

Amendments to the Procedure Bylaw No. 6910, 2004 to Allow for Changes in Notice, and Electronic Meetings
The City has a Procedure Bylaw that outlines, among other things, how we meet the Community Charter requirements for meeting notices, and what constitutes Quorum in Council. These proposed amendments will change the language of that Bylaw to match updated procedures.

The current Procedure Bylaw does not allow Council Meetings to be held remotely through telecommunications – there must be at least 4 members of Council present in chambers to constitute a quorum, otherwise the legal work we do (reading and adopting Bylaws) is not valid. Note the BC Government introduced some legislative changes today to change this, but we were meeting a few days ago, and suspect we still need ot enact our Bylaw to keep everything up to snuff.

We are still required to post notice of meetings in City Hall, but with City Hall closed, we are adding the City’s Website to that requirement (which is good idea for the future anyway). We are also replacing the need to put a notice of a Special Meeting in Council Member’s Personal mailboxes with the need to notify Council Members by E-mail, because it is 2008. Finally, as we need to receive Public Input before changing the Procedures Bylaw, we will be asking for this until the April 3 Special Council Meeting. Which I guess means we are having an April 3 Special Meeting. If you have comments or concerns, please send us an e-mail or letter.

Changes to Council Meetings during the period of the COVID-19 Pandemic
This is, by all definitions, a capital-E Emergency, so staff is suggestion some changes in how we meet as a Council during this time, balancing the need to get work done with the need to follow health authority orders and respecting social distancing protocols.

Our upcoming meetings will not include Open Delegations. There is just no reason to bring your concern in person to Council right now. Write us an e-mail.

We are going to ask Council to be very prudent in suggesting Notices of Motions, and the Mayor will act as a screen to assure we only bring up time-sensitive or important motions. Staff is wanting to avoid the situation like we had last meeting where a Council Member brought a motion that resulted in community outcry and a packed chamber of people from around the region to speak for and against it. We just don’t need that hassle at this time. As an aside, that specific Notice of Motion will be tabled until a more appropriate time.

As much public consultation and committee meetings cannot happen right now, but there is some concern that ongoing work that is important (even to the point of being crises – housing, childcare, climate action) will get delayed because Emergency > Crisis. Though we are putting some work aside right now, starting with cancelling next week’s public hearings, I do want us to think creatively about how we can bring some of those things back on-line, as this situation may stretch on for months, and lost progress will hurt.

I am especially interested to see how we can (technically, and legally) accommodate on-line submissions, set up an online submittal form, facilitate recorded video or audio input to public meetings, etc. Staff right now is pretty over-tasked adapting as much as they can to the emergency situation, so this is best thought of as work we can start once we get ourselves established into a new normal.

Scope of Work of Five COVID-19 Working Groups: Council Approval
As City Committees and Task Forces and much internal work in the City is grinding to a halt, there are some areas of specific need in the City. Staff have set up some temporary working groups/ task forces aligned with the biggest priorities right now. They will be working groups of City Staff, Senior Gov’t agencies, not-for-profit partners and business groups in town, depending on where the subject matter experts are.

There are three out-ward looking working group: At-risk and Vulnerable Populations; Seniors and Persons with Disabilities; and Business Continuity and Local Economy;

We also have two inward-looking working groups to address City operations: Human Resources; and Emergency Operations and IT.

Since the Agenda was put together, there have been two new outward-looking working groups: Childcare; and Education and Enforcement.

This will be the framework for future meetings and reports, so I won’t belabour them too much here.

Protection for Renters during COVID-19 Pandemic
As I blogged earlier, the City doesn’t have a lot of cash lying around, and measures to address the unexpected have to be funded. Staff are making some suggestions of how we can free up some reserve funds (money we have on hand already earmarked for specific purposes), and there is more discussions of budget down below. However, right now there are a lot of people worried about making rent on April 1st, because they have been laid off or their regular income sources are shut down. The City already supports a Rent Bank operated by the Purpose Society and supported by the Province and local Credit Unions. It is suggested that there may be a significant increase in need for this service the months ahead, and it is recommended we move money form the Affordable Housing Reserve Fund into this.

This conversation we knowingly a couple of days before the provincial government introduced their renter-protection measures, but we agreed to commit to a $100,000 infusion from our Affordable Housing Reserve in case it is needed, with a general wiliness to explore other supports that the City may be able to provide through that reserve fund.

COVID-19 New Westminster Emergency Response and Provincial Government Support Request
We are going to need senior government supports here. People, businesses and not-for-profits are lining up asking for supports of various kinds. Local Governments need to assure we are clear with what we need to support our communities and the priorities of our communities. We are prioritizing our requests to help with supply chain for our first responders in Fire and Rescue, Police, and Emergency Operations. Things like masks, sanitizer, gloves and other necessities are challenging to procure now, and the Provincial government has the power to control those supply chains to assure they get to those who need them the most. We also need to prioritize first responders for testing protocols, as they are by necessity, in close contact with many people all day. We need support for the Emergency Operations Centre, and for emergency shelter for the homeless and vulnerable people.

We have also identified an expanded Property Tax Deferral program, some help to replace lost local government revenues (like Casino revenues), and for a ban on eviction for renters. We also asked that some similar consideration be given to business lease-holders, those small businesses that are prevented from operating right now and will, ultimately, be the core of our economic recovery when this is all over.

2020 Budget
Obviously, things have changed since we put our draft budget together last month. We have always referred to it as “draft”, recognizing small adjustments may be necessary, but never in the history of the Local Government Act has so much changed in two weeks as the last two. We need to have a Budget Bylaw and 5-year Financial Plan approved by May, and the unprecedented amount of public consultation and discussion occurred outside of this shit show. Best laid plans. (insert grumpy face emoji).

Council moved to pull back on most of the enhancements in the budget for 2020, excepting those that are already “baked in” – such as changes in interest rates, insurance costs, collective agreements, and such. A 0% tax increase is a fanciful notion, as we have already made significant commitments to 2020 that cannot be undone, and other revenue sources aside from taxation (Casino revenues, parking revenues, recreation and program fees, etc.) are likely going to be much lower than expected. Of course, some savings will be found in not providing some services and there may be some layoffs of staff as some programs simply cannot operate. Problem is, our assumptions about the budget are more tentative than ever, as we don’t know how deep into our 2020-2021 budget year this disruption will continue, we have no idea what our emergency responses are going to cost, and we don’t know how much senior government support is coming to help. That’s a lot of uncertainty for what is usually a very tight and conservative budget process.

It is with a pretty heavy heart that I have to accept that some of the enhancements that we anticipated on 2020 will have to be deferred at least until the 2021 budget year. This does not mean we don’t support those programs, it’s just that with the uncertainty ahead, it is prudent for us to tighten the belt as much as we can to not get into a cash crunch problem.

Staff also suggested, due to the uncertainty of what the emergency response is going to cost, that we re-allocate the 1% Capital Levy to an Emergency Fund. I disagreed, as I think the capital program is still going to need to be funded. However, Council voted to support this change, and in the end the difference between the two approaches is more an instruction to staff about how to prioritize spending than a change in how much revenue we will bring in.

This situation is throwing a wrench on our capital plans for 2020-2024. Some projects will no doubt need to be delayed, though much of our Capital budget is mission-critical maintenance and replacement that will still have to go forward. There will be much more discussion of this in upcoming meetings.

There was a bit of closing roundtable after these items were addressed, to raise a few issues that were not on the agenda. I think the takeaway is that this is really uncharted water for everyone. We have an Emergency Plan and an Pandemic Response Plan, but the first is challenging as it may see a typical emergency as a single short-duration event with long recovery (think flood, earthquake, ice storm) which is clearly not the pattern here, and the latter has never been invoked before. Our emergency services and first responders are managing excellently, staff is doing their best to understand what the new priorities are, and how to address them while obviously being concerned about their own health and that of their families. Council is, ultimately, charged with making the budget and prioritization decisions based on best advice, but we have never had to rely as heavily on this advice (thank you Dr. Henry!) and feedback from residents and the business community about what the community’s priorities are.

Everyone is anxious, but everyone is doing their job as best they can. I think the Mayor and our Management Staff have shown great leadership and flexibility, and I left the meeting no less concerned about the impacts of this pandemic, but more assured that there are positive things we can do to help our community, to keep people safe, and to prepare for the inevitable after-effects on our community.

Reach out (metaphorically) to each other, folks. Find out what your neighbour needs, and if you can help. If you can think about those half-dozen small businesses in town that really make you proud to live in New West, now would be a good time to reach out to them and see if they have on-line offerings or delivery, or if there is any way you can help them bridge through this time. And if you need help, please reach out to the City, either through the Council e-mails, or through the City’s website (see a special section here). Take care of each other!

Social distance.

Posted on March 21, 2020March 21, 2020. by Patrick Johnstone. Leave a comment.

Strange days continue.

Like many people, I am stuck in this strange, soul-defeating cycle of trying to avoid Social Media and the radio news broadcasts, but feeling compelled to always be checking in lest I miss something important, combined with a need to feel connected with my neighbours and friends. I am not someone who typically suffers with anxiety, but am starting to recognize signs of anxiety in my behavior. I can’t concentrate on work or other tasks that take more than 5 minutes, like writing a blog post.

We all need to step back in our boredom and find the separation from the hourly updates. Find space to do the things that let you escape. I’m going for a bike ride right after I finish this, or maybe ill dig in the Garden. Find your escape.

Of course, I am working in my “regular job” as best I can with the virtual desktop, and trying to keep up with events in New West. There are updates here, if you feel that compelling need to check in. We have made a Declaration of Local Emergency, which may free up some resources and gives our Emergency management structures some delegated authority that we hope they won’t have to exercise. Staff are constantly in touch with the Health Authority and senior governments to make sure recommended procedures and protocols are followed. Council will have a meeting on Monday afternoon to help make any policy decisions that need to be made, and to allocate any resources that need to be allocated.

I think it is important for folks to recognize we are all on new ground here. The City has a Pandemic Response Plan developed after the SARS crisis, but it has never been activated before, and staff have to learn its operational parts, and determine what is applicable to the current situation and what is not. There are subject matter experts at the Fraser Health Authority and the Centre for Disease Control whose advice we can lean on, and we share resources and knowledge with our cohort communities, but no-one on the City’s staff (or the staff of any City) are experts at this, and therefore everyone is exercising caution.

What makes a “crisis” different than regular times is the will to act. Local governments, for a variety of reasons, are often reluctant or slow to act for fear of unknown or possible negative consequences – Cities are risk-adverse by regulation and by culture. A crisis is a time when that needs to shift to a fear of not acting, and we will tolerate some unforeseen risk, be it financial or doing something wrong, because that risk is smaller and more ephemeral than the real current risk we can see around us. None of this changes the limits of how a City can act within its delegated authority.

This crisis is also a strange, long-lasting one, with implications up and down our economy that are still unknown. This is one of those times where the stark differences between a business and a government are relevant. Although there are some services we can (or have to) shut down, like fitness programming or the Library, there are many we simply cannot. The City needs police and fire protection. Building inspections and permitting need to operate to keep the community safe. Water needs to keep flowing and be tested, sewer garbage collection systems need to keep working. As pool, recreation programs, and community centres wind down, the City needs to address the needs of its employees, especially as program cancellations stretch into months.

There is another aspect of how Cities work that most don’t think of, and that is our general lack of liquidity. Because of the strict regulations around our financing, we do not generally have a lot of unrestricted cash lying around. Most of our Reserves are earmarked for specific purposes by law, and we cannot move that money round at will. We are required every year to run balanced budgets, and our ability to borrow money on the fly is limited. Do the math on our annual financial plan, and you can see that New West runs through about $16M a month, and half of our income arrives when property tax bills are paid – this time of the year we are at the lowest level of our cash reserves. We do not (to my understanding) have the legal authority to defer property tax payments, and if we did, it would not be long before we ran out of cash.

Of course, every homeowner in BC who is over the age of 55 or has a child under the age of 18 can receive a deferral for their property taxes from the BC Government for a remarkably low interest rate. If you qualify and are feeling financial stress this year at tax time, I recommend you take advantage of this offer. This does not address the issue with small business taxes, and I am not sure (we have not discussed at Council yet) what legal options we have available to us to assist there. I am hopeful that the senior levels of government that do enjoy significantly more budget liquidity than local governments will step in to help here, as I would love to see the millions who work in small businesses in communities across the country get prioritized over airlines and oil companies.

That said, we do have options and more flexibility in our utilities accounts, so there may be some options here to allow some deferrals. We are already following the lead of BC Hydro and doing this with electrical bills, but have (again) not discussed the rest of utilities at Council yet, but I suspect we will on Monday.

I have talked informally with some of my Council colleagues and the Mayor about the situation. With limited and mixed information and no formal meetings, we of course have not made any decisions. However, I can tell you everyone has expressed unprecedented concern, and are worried about what we can do. We know many of the more vulnerable members of our community simply don’t have the resilience or support network to feel secure right now. We know a lot of small businesses are closing, and many are worried about when, or even if, they will be able to reopen. We know people are worried and anxious. So are we. But our community is strong, we have shown great spirit in supporting each other in the past. Every one of us lives and shops and plays and shares in this community, we are all committed to doing what we can to support the community we love.

So all that to say, there are better sources for info than my blog, and you should go there if you need info. City-wise, go to the City’s website for local updates. The Provincial Government website will have updates, and will the Centre for Disease Control. Don’t panic, be informed, but watch your sources, because there is a lot of bad info on Social Media right now.

We will be holding a Council Meeting on Monday, when I will be expecting some updates from staff and a challenging conversation about what this means to our 2020 budget process. There will not be public delegations at the meeting, so though it will be a public meeting with limited public seating (to respect Social Distancing protocols), we are highly recommending people stay home and watch the live stream.

Other than that, take care of each other folks, and think about how you can help others while keeping yourself safe. There are people in our community who cannot stay at home, who don’t have access to supports they may need, for whom this disruption is life-threatening. Every one of us on our own journey through this, so be kind.

Council – Mar. 9, 2020

Posted on March 11, 2020. by Patrick Johnstone. 2 Comments.

The March 9th Council meeting was a long one, and at time frustrating. We had the annual draw of the May Day Royal Suite, which is always fun for kids and parents, except when there is random political posturing. Then we had a large number of public delegations from across the lower mainland about an issue that was completely inappropriate for debate in a City Council chamber in New Westminster, especially when we had a full agenda of work to do… ugh.

We had a daytime workshop where we worked through some more details of the annual budget, but I’ll hold off on detailing more of that here until we get some Bylaws coming to City Council later in the Month. If you have opinions about the draft Budget, go here and get the data you need to make an argument, then some time in the next two weeks would be a great time to send Mayor and Council an e-mail.

The first Item of the night was a presentation:

Memorandum of Understanding between the City and Century House Association
I assume most people in New West know Century House exists, but not as many know it was a ground-breaking model when opened 60 years ago – the first stand-alone municipal “Seniors’ Centre” in Canada. And since 1958 or so, the running of Century House has been a collaboration between city staff and a non-profit volunteer society called the Century House Association.

Staff and the CHA have been working on an MOU to formalize this relationship and assure it continues to support the programming and operation of Century House. Nothing is changing here in the relationship between the City and the CHA, but there are advantages for both parties to having a non-binding MOU that clarifies roles and responsibilities ad avoids future conflicts.

The following items were Moved on Consent:

Appointment of Acting Director of Finance
Our Finance Director is changing Municipalities, and we need to formally name a new one because of a statutory requirement under the Local Government Act. We are doing so in an Acting role until we can complete a search.

Withdrawal of Motions Resubmitted to the Lower Mainland Local Government Association (LGA)
This is what happens when Councilors don’t do their homework and show up at a meeting and try to make decisions on the fly. The late add-on of two resolutions to the Lower Mainland LGA resolutions list last meeting were not required, because the resolutions had already gone to the UBCM executive and been endorsed. So we are withdrawing them now.

909 First Street: Rezoning and Development Permit for Infill Townhouses – Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 8188, 2020 for Two Readings
This proposal is to rezone a property in Glenbrook North to replace the single family house with four townhouses. The lot is a little smaller than envisioned in the Infill Townhouse and Rowhouse zoning (though still over 9,000 square feet), but is a corner lot with alley adjacent and the neighbouring property is also a large lot, so this application could be thought of as a bit of a test whether this type of development fits well in that specific instance.

This project will go to Public Hearing, so I will hold my comments until then.

45 East Eighth Avenue: Rezoning and Development Permit for a Four Unit Rowhouse Project – Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 8189, 2020 for Two Readings
This proposal is to rezone a lot in the Massey Victory Heights neighbourhood to build four rowhomes. There would be fee-simple row homes of the type that are not common in New West, but we are hoping to see more of as a “missing middle” housing form.

This project will go to Public Hearing, so I will hold my comments until then.

Metro Vancouver 2018 Regional Parking Study
TransLink and Metro Vancouver recently did a study of regional residential parking supply and demand, and we can use that 2018 data to inform how we plan and allocate parking in new developments.

The region-wide study looked at 73 buildings, included 5 Strata buildings in New West, two in Sapperton, two Downtown, and one in Queensborough. All are relatively recent builds, but all build (and therefore had their parking allocated) prior to the 2014 changes in New Westminster’s off-street parking requirements for buildings near SkyTrian. Unfortunately, there was sparse rental building data in the study.

The big take-away is that apartment parking supply exceeds use across the region – we are building too much parking. This is doubly true near SkyTrain. And interesting related finding is that bicycle storage is poorly executed across the region in multi-family buildings, and this is actively discouraging cycling. That said, our Zoning Bylaw provides incentives to reduce parking requirements (such as end-of-trip cycling facilities, car-share parking, etc.) align well with the findings of the study.

There is a lot more in this study, and I look forward to a deeper dive. As we look at updating these parking requirements, this study will provide us some good data to underpin new policy. More to come here!

Port Royal Dog Off-leash Area Update and Launch of City-Wide Strategy for Dogs
We are still looking at a new off-leash dog area at Port Royal since the one near the old animal shelter need to be closed. We had some proposals that went to public consultation, and all of them had significant push-back from neighboring properties. Everybody wants a dog park nearby; no-one wants a dog park too nearby, and hence governance is hard.

The City is going to step back and launch a City-Wide Strategy for Dogs. We have unmet need in a couple of neighbourhoods for dog socializing and exercise areas, increased demand on parks space for all users, and no real unified vision of how to manage this.

The following items were Removed from Consent for discussion:

Inter-Municipal Ride-Hailing Business Licence Bylaws: Bylaws for Three Readings and Opportunity to be Heard
This introduction of a multi-jurisdictional business license scheme for ride-hailing businesses was a more monumental task than most people will ever realize. It had to happen fast because it really could not be developed until the provincial regulatory framework was made clear, and getting 25 of 31 Municipalities to agree on a framework and roll out a comprehensive Bylaw in such short notice is unprecedented outside of wartime. Serious kudos to the Mayor’s Council and its Chair for guiding the region through these challenging political discussions, to the Bylaws staff in those 25 Municipalities for doing the work, and to Vancouver for taking on the extra administrative burden for the rest of the region of being the licensing authority for the region.

I am still not convinced that the current ride-hailing model provides a net benefit to the region, or that the well-established safety, traffic congestion, workers’ rights, emissions, and equity issues that result from it are offset by the convenience gains for so few. However, it is clear that society has accepted those costs, that the provincial government is not interested in proactively addressing them, and that local governments will, once again, be required to take on those burdens without a proportionate share of the revenue. If a regulatory approach is available to local governments, it will be through Business Licensing, and we may be able to react with regulatory measures when these operations start to show local impacts that residents will inevitably be asking us to address.

The sharing of data from the ride-hailing providers that will allow the region to track how the service is being used is a significant win, and will provide vital data to any future regulatory changes.

New West has to pass its own Bylaws to support this regional initiative, and an opportunity to be Heard on these Bylaws will occur on March 30, 2020, C’mon out and tell us what you think!

Interim Business Property Tax Relief Program
Our property tax system is borked. It is not progressive, and as a policy framework it creates a variety of intended and unintended economic signals. However, it is the system we have, and many have ideas how to fiddle with the edges to address those unintended impacts.

One problem has been identified in how properties are assessed at “highest and best use”, which means as a growing region develops and puts pressure on land use, underdeveloped lands see their value increase as much as developed lands adjacent – which is a structural problem exacerbated when land values are much higher than the value of the buildings/improvements on that land. Over decades, our property tax system has also become skewed to charge much more on commercial and industrial lands than on residential lands, and most business leases make the tenant, not the landowner, responsible for paying taxes. Pile all of this up, and increased tax pressure is most felt by small businesses.

The provincial has looked at this issue, and proposed an interim tax relief regime for 5 years starting in 2020 to be offered to a locally-derived list of small business types, not-for-profits and/or arts and culture organizations. There are some problems with this plan, including a lack of time to properly implement it in a way that would be fair and immune from court challenges, especially as we already in the middle of putting together our 2020 budget bylaws right now.

Several cities have signed onto a letter drafted by a group of a dozen Mayors saying “No Thank you, please give us Split Assessments instead”. This is the idea that a piece of land can be split so the value at current use can be changed one tax rate, and the difference between that and “highest and best use” can be charged a different, presumably lower, tax rate. I have my own concerns with that proposal as well as it appears to provide a significant financial incentive to leave land vacant or underdeveloped (not a great economic signal in a housing crisis) and act to encourage speculative holding of that land as an investment. With those concerns in mind, I see no reason to sign onto this letter – I don’t like asking the province for something unless I am sure I want it.

Council decided not to sign on to this letter, but we will have a report beck form staff on potential property tax changes that may be available to us to address some of the structural issues this idea is meant address.

Motions Passed at the December 4, 2019 Meeting of ACTBiPed and the February 27, 2020 Meeting of YAC
The last meeting of ACTBiPed (it has been replaced with a Sustainable Transportation Advisory Committee) was a busy one, with discussions resulting in two calls for better cycling and pedestrian infrastructure related to two of the bigger development in the near future of New West: The High School replacement and the Sapperton Green project at Braid Station.

Thanks to some pressure applied by the local HUB chapter, a safe cycling connection between the Crosstown Greenway and the new high school has been identified by staff and Council as a priority, and staff have proposed that a connection on the Moody Park side (8th Street) can be accomplished by the time the high school opens. HUB has identified a connection along 6th Street as preferable, and are asking that it be built by the time the School opens. Staff has several technical reasons why this is a much more difficult project to complete (mostly due to the need to accommodate safe and accessible transit stops and a lack of road width available). They are not saying it is impossible, they are saying there are challenges that make it very difficult to get it done in short order, and unlikely to get through those hoops before the School opens.

I am not comfortable moving other cycling and pedestrian priorities to this project, and would rather the connection via 6th be completed as part of the planned upgrades to the Crosstown Greenway. We equally need to support students taking transit and walking to school, and making all three integrate is a challenge we need time o address responsible. We have committed to having a safe separated cycling route vie the Moody Park route, and will incorporate a 6th Street connection along with the work we are doing to change the 6th Street streetscape in the next year or two.

On the Sapperton Green project, the ACTBiPed were asked to opine on the plans for the site, and felt that it was not as “car light” as it could be, considering its location on a Transit Station and the “blank slate” that the developers have been given to work with. It still looks like the dominant mode at surface is cars, and that avoiding cars will be the #1 priority of people attempting to walk or roll across the site. Cars will be the #1 concern of residents walking their kids to daycare, to the community centre, to school. I would support changes that reduced the surface expression of car space and reduced parking requirements for the site.

We then did our regular Bylaw Shuffle (with a nuanced difference that only the most astute Council-watchers will notice) including the following Bylaws for Adoption:

Housing Agreement (65 First Street) Bylaw No. 8178, 2020
This Housing Agreement that will provide some security for the renting residents of this strata complex that is being sold for potential redevelopment was Adopted by Council. It’s the Law of the Land.

Heritage Revitalization Agreement Amendment Bylaw (815 Milton Street) No. 8179, 2020
This Bylaw that amends the Heritage Revitalization Agreement for this heritage house so it can be slightly raised and have tandem parking was Adopted by Council. Lift away!

We had a couple of pieces of New Business</b:

Partnership with Earth Day Canada
Motion THAT the City of New Westminster partner with Earth Day Canada and Potentially Local Environmental Groups to coordinator an annual Earth Day
celebration or activity in our community.
The Mayor moved this idea that the City support a bump up in our earth day participation, and partner with groups to make it happen. This is totally in line with the work we are doing to address the Climate Emergency and raise awareness of the work we need to do as a community and a society to reduce our impact on the ecosystems that support us. Council moved unanimously to support this.

Notice of Motion: A Resolution to Oppose the Indian Government’s Citizens Amendment Act and National Registration of Citizens, and to Seek Action from the Canadian Government
Therefore be it resolved, that the City of New Westminster asks the federal government to take a position in opposition of these regressive discriminatory acts, and that the parliament of Canada supports the pluralist coexistence of all residents of India regardless of culture, religion or caste.

This Notice of Motion (a notice that the Motion will come to Council next meeting) was the source of almost two hours of delegations at Council from people across Greater Vancouver, about equal numbers supporting the motion and opposing. Although I learned a variety of things about the internal politics of India during the delegations, I was pretty frustrated that this was how we spent the bulk of our meeting time. As much as I am troubled by some actions of the current Indian government, I feel completely uninformed about this specific issue, and honestly do not have the time or energy to do the research necessary to inform myself on this issue enough to support any position. I heard the passion of the people who delegated, and I am sure this issue is close to their heart, so I do not want to take anything away from them, but this is not an issue I am comfortable with New Westminster City Council getting involved in.

This Happened (v.5)

Posted on March 7, 2020. by Patrick Johnstone. Leave a comment.

Yikes, too much going on since last time I reported out on my Council-adjacent activities, so I’ll keep this short. One paragraph each (scroll down to see if I keep that promise, kinda curious if I do myself…)

I am on the Lower Mainland LGA executive, and we had an executive meeting to move some business along, which was mostly about making some fundamental program decisions about the 2020 conference we are planning for the beginning of May. It looks like a great program, so if you are a Local Government elected type reading this (and who else would?) make sure you register!

I gave opening greetings as “Acting Mayor” at the 2020 Innovation Expo at Anvil Centre. This annual event is part of the Intelligent New West program, where we bring people working in tech and innovation in the private sector together with people from the public sector to talk about how the two can work together to build capacity and promote investment in science and engineering. One of New West’s innovative businesses – Landcor – was a major sponsor of the event this year, and the event was really well attended.

Last weekend, the City of New West also hosted the semi-annual Council of Councils meeting, where local elected types from accross Metro Vancouver get together to get an update on what Metro Vancouver is up to. I guess I should write a blog post about separately!

On the same day, a few of us from Council attended the annual Royal New Westminster Regiment Mess Dinner, which is an event I have never actually had the honour of attending before. I was lucky to be seated with some members involved in the Cadet programs, and it was great to hear about the work they do, and the role they play in the community.

I am now serving as Chair of two new Council advisory committees: Facilities, Infrastructure, and Public Realm Advisory Committee (“FIPRAC”) and the Sustainable Transportation Advisory Committee (“STAC”), and both had their opening meeting in the last two weeks. It occurs to me now that I need to write another blog post about this, and how we are envisioning our new advisory committees being more effective and efficient.

For reasons too complicated to get into here, I was able to tour the OceanWise laboratory at the Pacific Science Enterprise Centre, which is what we are now calling the old DFO laboratories in West Vancouver. I was there to learn about some of the work OceanWise is doing to better understand microplastic pollution in our marine environment. This is an emerging area of science, as the impacts of residual clothing fibres, tire dust, paint chips, and other microscopic plastic particles are not well understood, even as we are now recognizing they have become ubiquitous in our oceans, air and sediments, and are becoming more common in marine micro- and mega-fauna. We may be some distance from knowing if we have any policy levers to do anything about this, but the foundational science is being done to at least allow us a better understanding of the problem.

I am also the Chair of the Community Energy Association, a not-for-profit agency that helps communities across BC (and increasingly adjacent parts of Yukon and Alberta) set and achieve energy and greenhouse gas emission reduction goals. We had a meeting last week where we approved a 2020 budget and set some priorities for special initiatives for the year ahead (including a new website, so enjoy this one while it lasts!).

I had a brief telephone interview with CKNW’s Jill Bennett on the morning of February 29th to talk about Council’s plans to undertake a master planning exercise for the 22nd Street Station area. It is interesting that a mention of reducing auto-dependency, even as a long-term plan in light of a Climate Emergency, triggers a strong reaction for people. Even as we continue to have a regional vision of less car dependency, the idea that we can create an area attractive to people who choose to not be car-reliant, even in a small underdeveloped area around a 30-year-old SkyTrain station, is treated with the level of incredulity expected if we were planning a moon base.

I was able to attend the small vigil/gathering at Hyack Square last weekend to show support for the Wet’suwet’en people and express hopes for respectful dialogue and a peaceful resolution for the current dispute. It was nice to see some local engaged residents come out, and I had some great conversations with people. Although there has been some positive news coming out of Victoria and Smithers as the two sides work towards resolution, the discussion on that day was mostly around how unhealthy and divisive the conversation was in the social and traditional media on this topic. Having a gathering of people support a more respectful model of discourse left me feeling more positive about our community. Thanks to the organizers for this!

There was also a successful fundraiser event thrown last weekend by the Rotary Club of New Westminster that brought a couple of hundred people to the Royal City Centre atrium to have a some snacks and taste craft beer from around the region as an excuse to raise money for two great organizations in the City, I’s on the Street and KidSport.

Finally, the Royal City Curling Club is winding its season down over March, and Team DeGobbi went into the playoffs in 12th seed, and won our first game against the #5 seed but then lost our second game to the 14th seed, so we have the long row to hoe if we plan to go deep in the playoffs. If you are wondering where I am Tuesdays and Thursday evenings…

Resolutions

Posted on February 28, 2020February 28, 2020. by Patrick Johnstone. 1 Comment.

Monday’s meeting (which I rambled on about here) was also one where several resolutions were passed. All were timely, some because of current events, some because the deadline for submission to the Lower Mainland Local Government Association is approaching. Endorsement by this area association improves the odds that the resolution will make the floor and be endorsed by the Union of BC Municipalities.

Resolutions are one way that Local Governments raise issues not strictly within our jurisdiction but still relevant to our community, and formally call upon senior governments to take actions that we don’t have the power to take. These types of resolutions are typically directed at senior governments and are a pretty standard practice in local governments across BC and Canada.

You can read the full text of the resolutions at the end of our Agenda here, so for the purpose of this blog, I’m going to skip over the “whereas” statements that create the context for them, and pare them down to the specific call, then add a few of my comments after. All of the following resolutions were supported by Council:

National Pharmacare Program Councillor Nakagawa

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of New Westminster write a letter calling on the Federal Government to work with the provinces and territories to develop and implement a Universal Public National Pharmacare program as a top priority; and

THAT this letter be forwarded to all BC municipalities asking to write expressing their support for a National Pharmacare Program.

THAT the following resolution be submitted to FCM:

THAT the Federation of Canadian Municipalities calls on the Federal Government to work with the provinces and territories to develop and implement a Universal Public National Pharmacare program as a top priority.

The time for national Pharmacare is now. It was actually a few decades ago, when most modern social democracies included pharamcare as part of their national healthcare systems, but hindsight is as powerful as prescription glasses. It has been said that Canada’s is the least socialized of all socialized healthcare systems in the industrialized world, as so many parts of health care considered primary in progressive nations (pharmacare, dental care, vision care, etc) are not part of our “universal” care.

Four of the 5 Parties in the House of Commons, representing 67% of the seats, have publicly supported publicly funded Phamacare, it really comes down to whether the party with the plurality is going to follow through this time, or continue to pull a Lucy with the football.

Declaration of Solidarity with Wet’suwet’en Councillor Nakagawa

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of New Westminster calls on the Governments of British Columbia and Canada to suspend permits authorizing construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline and commence good-faith consultation with the Wet’suwet’en People;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City of New Westminster calls on the Governments of British Columbia and Canada to end any attempt at forced removal of Wet’suwet’en People from their traditional territories and refrain from any use of coercive force against Wet’suwet’en People seeking to prevent the construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline through non-violent methods.

This resolution seems to have garnered more attention than the others, including the usual Facebook calls for Council to “stay in its own lane” and “stop wasting time”. These appeared to mostly come from people who, by reading their comments, I assume did not read the resolution.

I’ve been slow to enter the on-line fray about the ongoing protests launched by the arrest of land defenders in the Wet’suwe’ten territory. I am not even sure how to talk about this without centering myself in the conversation, and as the conversation is not lacking in middle aged white guys from urban areas with a hot take, I’m not I add value to the discourse.

Since the road directly in front of my office was occupied for a few hours last week, I was able to watch the orderly challenging of all that is disorderly in one of the busiest car/pedestrian/transit intersections in Vancouver. I spent a bit of time in that crowd after work, and tried my best to listen and to reflect on what this disruption means, and how its impact compares to the strong feelings I had coming out the Climate Strike last September. But ultimately, I don’t think my feelings or ideas are what this is about. This is about whether the words of reconciliation, so easily invoked by those in power, have meaning when the boots (and pipes) hit the ground.

As New Westminster engages in relationship-building with local First Nations, I think it is valuable for us, as a Council to have conversations about what these events mean in the bigger context, both here in New West and with a wider community. We need to be open to understand the relationship between the colonization that was our modern community’s founding and the ongoing colonization of unceded territory in British Columbia. Like pharmacare (above) and transportation (below), this resolution is not “outside our lane”, but the exact appropriate process in our empowering legislation for us to communicate our desires to the other orders of Government.

I thanked Councillor Nakagawa for a well-written and nuanced resolution (which, again, seems to have been missed by most Facebook commenters). It calls for good-faith consultation with the entire Wet’suwe’ten community and for an end to violence and forced removal. Those latter tools are the ones Canada has traditionally used – and often later apologized for using – when Indigenous people have tried to protect their lands, commonly following bad-faith consultation. This pattern needs to stop. The resolution is not about natural gas or benefits agreements or about traditional vs. elected leadership; it is about fostering a new form of respect for Indigenous people in light of UNDRIP. I am for respectful dialogue and against violence, so I am proud to support this resolution.

#AllOnBoardCampaign Councillor Johnstone

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the provincial government work to make transit access more equitable by supporting free public transit across BC for youth under 19 years of age; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the provincial government support a sliding scale monthly pass system based on income; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT BC Transit and TransLink proactively end the practice of fare evasion ticketing of minors, and introduce community service and restorative justice options for adults as an alternative to fare evasion tickets.

Similar resolutions were sent to UBCM last year from several communities, in support of this ongoing regional campaign being led by anti-poverty groups and including labour groups, business groups and other stakeholders, but they were not considered due to being bumped by a similar-sounding but quite different resolution around increasing Transportation Assistance for Low-Income Individuals. So we have updated the language to better address existing Provincial policy statements, and are trying again.

Clean vehicle incentives Councillor Johnstone

BE IT RESOLVED THAT: the provincial government expand the Clean Energy Vehicle program to include financial incentives for the purchase of electric assist cycles in scale with the incentives provided for the purchase of electric automobiles.

E-assist cycles are a growing market, and bridge the gap to cycling accessibility for many people. As a regular cycle commuter, I see the increase in numbers of people using e-assist bicycles to extend their cycling commute, and to get them past barriers like the hills of New Westminster. It is especially noticeable that users of e-assist bikes fit a different demographic than your typically hardy cycling commuter, and are generally older and include more women. My octogenarian mother in law has an e-assist trike that she now uses for more and more of her daily trips because the hills she used to be able to ride up are now accessible to her again. The e-assist allows people to carry groceries and other needs on the bike. It really is a game-changer

The big impact of e-assist technology is not making people on bikes faster (they are speed regulated), but in getting people out of cars. Replacing some portion of car trips for people who find cycling a barrier. As such, there is no public policy or community benefit to electric cars that is not also achieved through the use of e-assist cycles, and as such, subsidies given by government to people fortunate enough to be able to afford a $50,000 car should be extended to people purchasing $1,500 e-assist cycles.

School Bus Safety Councillor Johnstone

BE IT RESOLVED THAT UBCM call upon the BC Ministry of Education and the BC Ministry of Public Safety to mandate that all buses transporting students in British Columbia be equipped with seat belts that meet Transport-Canada regulatory standards and institute programs to assure those belts are used safely.

A similar resolution went to UBCM last year after a resident of Queensborough raised this issue to Council, however it was not considered by the membership at UBCM due to timing. In the year since, Transport Canada has developed new guidelines and is piloting a school bus seatbelt safety project. This resolution is still relevant in the modified form as it asks the relevant departments of the Provincial Government to follow up on the initiative launched by Transport Canada.

Council – Feb 24, 2020

Posted on February 26, 2020. by Patrick Johnstone. Leave a comment.

I start the occasional council report talking about busy weeks, but this was a seriously busy week. Two evening meetings, public hearings, workshops, and budget, budget, budget. There is a lot to report though it being busy makes it hard for me to find time to write stuff, so I am breaking this up into a few blog posts. I am not going to talk about the budget discussions now, as those conversations deserve their own space, so I am going to cover the rest of Council here. You can watch the video here, which is extra interesting to my Mom on account of the Acting Mayor thing and all.

After a proclamation on Pink Shirt Day, our Regular Agenda began with two presentations:

Pattullo Bridge Replacement Project Update
Staff from the Ministry of Transportation Project team came to give Council and the public an update on the project. We can expect that some preliminary geotechnical work (drilling holes to confirm soil conditions) will start soon, and the main work on the bridge starting this spring. There was also some info about community outreach the construction team is going to do to manage inevitable construction conflicts.

I’m excited to see this project actually moving. It has been a good decade of conversation and false starts, and the public consultation has been comprehensive. At this point, the real focus for the city will be making sure the final design details for the landing on the New West side will integrate as well as possible into the urban area around it. I am especially concerned that the east-west movements past the bridge entrance are improved, so Victoria Hill residents can feel more connected to Downtown, and vice versa. You can get project info here.

Sapperton Green Master Plan Update (97 Braid Street)
The development called Sapperton Green, which is proposed to replace the warehouses between Braid Station and Hume Park, was presented as a Master Plan back in 2017. It has recently been revised to support affordable housing in alignment with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Policy. As presented, this change could bring a bunch of affordable housing, but would represent a 23% increase in residential density on the site.

There was also some discussion about the Phasing of the project, which would see the Braid Street frontage built up as part of a Phase 1, including affordable, purpose built rental, and strata housing along with some commercial space. Phase 2 would cover the area around the Braid Station and where the current Amazon warehouse is, then a third Phase would build the Hume Park side.

Council moved to endorse the changes to the Master Plan in concept prior to them going to Public Consultation. There will be some open houses and a chance for public feedback, you can get some details here.

The following items were Moved on Consent:

Recruitment 2020 Appointment to Board of Variance
We appoint people to the Board of Variance, a provincially-regulated commission in the City. As one of the people selected to serve on it for a three-year term is now in conflict due to getting a job working for the City, so we need to replace them, which we did.

Arts Commission Representative to the Public Art Advisory Committee
There is a rep of the Arts Commission on the PAAC, nominated by the Art Commission itself, which Council now ratifies.

65 First Street: Housing Agreement Bylaw No. 8178, 2020 for First, Second and Third Readings
This is an interesting case. An older mid-rise condo building near the Pattullo has been sold to a developer, which means some majority of the owners of the Strata units have agreed to the sale. As a complicating factor, the building apparently has some long-standing maintenance issues. However, many of the units are currently being rented out at relatively low rent levels, suggesting that the sale may result in renoviction or demovictions of some lower-income residents.

The developer wants to develop the property, but no development proposal has come to Council yet. The developer would like to continue to rent the units until such a time as a development plan can be hammered out and approved, but the renters in the building are in limbo. So staff is recommending the City and the developer enter into a Housing Agreement to provide some protection for those residents.

That housing agreement stipulates that the rentals will follow the City’s Business Regulations Bylaw (the one that was just upheld by the Courts), and the Residential Tenancy Act, and that the existing rental units (22 of the 61 units in the building) will have the same rent as prior to the sale, and only have RTA-available annual increases, as long as the current tenants are there. There will also be extra tenant protection measures in the event a Development Plan for the property is approved by Council at some time in the future.

There may be some further discussion of the details, but this seems like a reasonable and compassionate approach – it protects the current vulnerable tenants, allows the owners with a bunch of sunk equity in to the condos to move on as they choose, and gives the developer a clear pathway to redevelopment of their property. Council moved to ask staff to put together the Housing Agreement.

Miscellaneous Zoning Bylaw Amendments: Zoning Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bylaw No. 8172, 2020 for Two Readings
This is an update of our existing Zoning Bylaw to fix a few inconsistencies, like references to senior government legislation that may have changed overtime, clarifying some definitions, renumbering some sections to be internally consistent, etc. This will not change how zoning works in the City, just make them internally and externally consistent. As this is a Zoning Bylaw amendment, it will go to Public Hearing on March 30th. Read Attachment 2, then come out to tell us what you think!

Poverty Reduction Planning and Action Grant Application Council Resolution
The City has a poverty reduction committee, led by the City but involving the various non-profits operating in the City to address poverty and its impacts. We are applying for a Provincial Grant to support two programs as part of that initiative; and application that requires a Council Resolution in support.

2020 Spring Freshet and Snow Pack Level
This is the first snowpack / ENSO report of the season. We typically get these between the middle of winter until after freshet in order to evaluate the flood risk in the CIty and allow us time to put any mitigative measures in place if risk is higher than usual. Snowpack is a bit high, ENSO conditions are predicted to be neutral, so risk is slightly elevated for spring floods, but nothing to respond to yet.

Recommendations from Intelligent City Advisory Committee
The last Meeting of the Intelligent City Advisory Committee mostly involved discussion about the fate of the program after the Advisory committee is disbanded. There is an Intelligent City Strategy, and an operational plan for the three pillars of the Strategy. We have staffed up and have the work in the strategy included in the staff work plans. The three pillars of the strategy will be parsed out to existing advisory committees, and a staff member is specifically assigned to manage the coordination between the three and is accountable for the measureable goals of the Strategy. A staff working group will continue to draw on the expertise of the community members who have been so instrumental in getting the Intelligent City program off the ground and working.

We then broke and started our Public Hearing for the night:

Zoning Amendment Bylaw (2223 Ninth Avenue) No. 8180, 2020
This property in Connaught Heights has an older house on it, and due to some historic redevelopment practices dealing with slopes in Connaught Heights, it is sitting at a lower grade than the properties on either side. The owner wants to redevelop the property and build a house similar in grade and size to the ones on either side, but that requires a rezoning. The house will have a secondary suite and a Laneway house.

No-one sent Council correspondence on this request, and no-one came to address the Public Hearing. Council moved to give the application Third Reading.

Zoning Amendment Bylaw (719 Colborne Street) No. 8176, 2020
This property in Glenbrooke North is on a unique narrow-but-long lot and a single family home on it with a large garage built during original development. The owner wants to formalize a basement suite and a small accessory living unit above the garage. This will not increase the footprint of the buildings in any way, but is simply a conversion in use of existing buildings.

There was one piece of correspondence received on this application, expressing some concerns about the intended use. The proponent and one neighbor in opposition (over street parking and traffic concerns) came to address Council at the Public Hearing. Council moved to give the application Third Reading and Adoption.

Heritage Revitalization Agreement Amendment Bylaw (815 Milton Street) No. 8179, 2020
This heritage home in the Brow of the Hill neighborhood is protected by a Heritage Designation Bylaw, and the owner proposes to lift the house 4 inches to make the basement livable, and put in a legal basement suite. For a few complicate reasons related to the protection of the house, this minor change requires an amendment of the HRA Bylaw. No-one wrote to Council about this or came ot the Public Hearing to speak to the matter, and Council moved to give the amendment Bylaw Third Reading.

We then had two <b<Opportunities to be Heard on Development Variances:

Development Variance Permit DVP00673 for 301 Stewardson Way
This is a Development Variance request to allow for a variance of the Sign Bylaw to support Key West’s new signage program as part of their overall site redevelopment that is being buttoned up as we speak. The signage plan is not out of scale with the building or design, and nothing unexpected for a business of this style.

We had one neighbor come and express concern about light intrusion from the car dealerships. I have some sympathy for this concern, as having large parking lots that can be seen from the surface of the moon at night is good for security of the site and presence, but is a questionable practice in light of a variety of health and environmental concerns related to light pollution. However, the sign variance was not one that was going to make this situation worse, nor was it an appropriate method through which to address outdoor business lighting in the City. Council vote to approve the variance.

Development Variance Permit DVP00675 for 510 St. George Street
This is a variance to allow a heritage home in Queens Park to be lifted by three feet to make the basement a livable space. It would exceed the zoning for building height by quite a bit (almost 5 feet), but would not be completely out of context of surrounding heritage buildings. They are also doing some heritage restorations of the building along with the lifting. We received no correspondence and no-one came to speak to the variance. Council moved to grant the variance.

We then went back into Regular Council to address the items Removed from Consent for discussion:

Amendments to the Sign Bylaw: Election Signs
After a recent discussion of the sign bylaw as it relates to election signs, Staff have worked on the language of the proposed Bylaw changes, and are prepping a bylaw to take out to public consultation. This consultation will include stakeholder consultation with the Provincial and Federal parties, and all of the candidates who ran in the most recent Local Government elections.

Land Use Policy: Work Program for Endorsement
This is a bit of Staff asking Council where to prioritize their work for 2020-2021, given a tight budget and a lot of demands. Council has asked for Staff to provide some visioning of a “car-light” master plan for the 22nd Street Station area, or Connaught Heights and immediately adjacent areas of the West End. We had previously asked for some guidance on Infill housing to allow more duplex and triplex development in the city, which would mean deferring the Infill housing initiative.

I was torn about this, as I have a reflex response that says “let’s do what we already said we were going to do before we take on something new”. However, this is a case where the Climate Emergency declaration means we need to think about priorities and how we shift them to address the emergency at hand. It is clear that the redevelopment of a low-density area immediately adjacent to a SkyTrain station following Transit-Oriented Development principles and adding on a visionary layer of what a “Car Light” or even “car Free” community looks like in the decade ahead is a chance to push the envelope a bit.

We need to take bold moves when they are offered to us. So I support the change.

Recruitment 2020: Appointment of Members to the Massey Theatre Working Group
The Massey Theatre is going to be a City Asset next year, as the School District hands the building (and all of it’s maintenance and operational costs) over to the City. The City has struck a task force to oversee this transition and advise Council on making it as smooth as possible for everyone concerned. We appointed Councillors Trentadue and McEvoy to that Task force.

We then went through Bylaws including the following adoptions:

Housing Agreement (228 Nelson’s Crescent) Amendment Bylaw No. 8149, 2019
Housing Agreement (268 Nelson’s Court) Bylaw No. 8148, 2019
These Housing Agreements that will guarantee Purpose Built Rental in two new buildings at the Brewery District were adopted by Council. PBR is still being built in New West, and is still needed!

Official Community Plan Amendment (1111 Sixth Avenue) Bylaw No.8145, 2019
Heritage Revitalization Agreement (1111 Sixth Avenue) Bylaw No.8146, 2019
These Bylaws support the construction of a Daycare and accessory building adjacent to the heritage church in the Brow of the Hill were adopted by Council.

And that was the Agenda except for a few Resolutions, which I think I’ll write about in a follow-up post, because I think I’ll give people time to actually read them before they comment on them.

Budget 2020!

Posted on February 22, 2020February 22, 2020. by Patrick Johnstone. Leave a comment.

This week in Council we are going to be talking about the Budget, and are asking people to once again provide us some feedback on budget issues. Providing this feedback is difficult for many people, or it is hard to understand how your feedback will be incorporated, because municipal finance is a little bit arcane. So I thought before the meeting, with the reports and tables on line here, I would give you a bit of a run-down of how the budget process works.

We have already had some lengthy discussions about the capital budget. This is the budget we use to pay for things like buildings and vehicles and computers. These are (mostly) one-time items, though most need periodic replacement, and (mostly) tangible objects, though we can use capital funds to fund planning for tangible objects, like hiring a consultant to develop an Urban Forest Strategy that will result in capital expenses to buy and maintain trees.

The City is required to balance its budget over a five-year financial plan, so when we talk about “Budget2020”, we are talking about an excerpt of the overall 2020-2024 Financial Plan. Following from this, our 2020 Capital Budget is part of a 5-year Capital Plan, which makes sense because most large infrastructure works cannot be planned, financed, completed and paid for in a single year.

Our draft budget has a 5-year capital plan to spend ~$468 Million on new buildings, infrastructure and equipment, with a some of that representing a few major projects: The ~$100M Canada Games Pool, $54M for a district energy utility, a ~$40M electrical substation in Queensborough, ~$17M to fix up the Massey Theatre, $20M in road paving, etc. This includes the Utility capital investments ($123M for Electrical, $50M for Sewer, $25M for water, and $1.6M for solid waste). In 2020, we are budgeting to spend ~$140 Million of that total.

The City has three options to pay for any capital expenditure: reserves, debt or revenue. Reserves are the monies we have in the bank, some to assure financial solvency, some earmarked specifically for projects, like the money we have put aside for the Canada Games Pool replacement. If there is a reserve fund appropriate for the spending we plan, then drawing from those reserves make sense, though we have to be cautious about drawing those accounts too low because they provide us some financial resiliency, and improve the rates we get from banks when we borrow. Borrowing to pay for infrastructure makes sense for a recreation centre much the way it makes sense to get a mortgage for your house: the people using it pay for its use while it is being used. We have a *lot* of debt room in the City as far as regulations and good financial planning are concerned, but we have to address the public tolerance to take on debt (through a public process when we take out loans), and of course manage the cost of borrowing. The third option is to draw from revenues in the year we have the expense, be those revenues in the form of a grant from senior government or through raising taxes. These both, of course, have limits.

The part of the annual budget that directly impacts your tax rates is the Operational Budget. It is from this budget that we pay staff and buy paper and diesel. Sometimes a pundit in town will chagrin “most of the City’s spending goes directly to salaries!”, to which my only retort is “Yeah, and?” The City provides services more than we build widgets. Widget ore is not as big and expense as delivery of those services, which are delivered by people, from lifeguards to librarians to police officers. Sure, we buy asphalt and pipes, and firefighters need firetrucks, but most of our budget is service delivered by people.

We spend most of the year operating the City based on the operating budget set in the previous spring. As the year goes along, staff, Council and the public identify places where the City can do things differently, where our service is not meeting demands, or where new services are being pondered. Some small things may get done as staff find space in their existing budget to make them happen (or stop doing other things to make the room). But some things are more costly or need more staff time to manage, so managers put forward an “enhancement request” – they ask for more money.

Part of the task of our senior management team is to review all of these enhancement requests, and decide what is reasonable and what isn’t, then set some priorities. Council is not directly involved in that process, but the priority-setting is based on a framework of Strategic Planning created by Council. One of the questions staff need to ask themselves and each other at this stage is – does this enhancement meet a strategic goal of the Council? Then ask if we can afford it. Which is where Council comes in.

Before these enhancement requests, the draft 2020 budget sees costs equaling a 3.9% tax increase already baked into our 5-year financial plan. These are things like increased debt servicing, annual salary increases, inflationary pressures and financing of earlier enhancement commitments already made by Council in previous budgets. Staff have brought forward new enhancement requests equaling just under another 2% of taxes. They then recommended that about half of these enhancements be included in the 2020 budget, and the other half deferred to a future year. This equals out to a draft 4.9% tax increase.

There is an interaction between the Capital and Operational budget. The interest we earn on our reserves is a revenue that is included in our operational budget, so draw those reserves down and we have less revenue. Similarly, the interest we pay on our loans is an operational expense. There is also an operational impact to many capital projects: the NWACC will cost money to heat and light, and will need to be staffed. It will also bring in revenues. Those numbers will be different for the NWACC as they are for the current CGP. These changes have to be budgeted towards.

Since we have a regulatory requirement to balance the budget at the end of the year, if we pull in more revenue (through taxes, charges for services like parking and permits, grants from senior governments, investment income, etc.) in a year than we spend (on salaries, supplies, grants, etc.) that extra money (“profit!”) goes into our reserves and helps offset future capital budget costs. The corollary to this, of course, is that a large capital budget requires us to raise taxes a bit to keep these reserves at a stable level and to pay debt servicing costs.

(I have almost completely skipped utilities in this discussion, I talked a bit about them, with fancy coloured diagrams to show how those work in this blog post from a couple of years ago)

So, this week Council will be asked in two meetings (Monday AND Tuesday nights) to review the budget, review the results of the public consultations that occurred around the budget, and provide one more public meeting where people can come and address council with their concerns regarding the budget. We will review the capital budget commitments for 2020, and will review the recommended and non-recommended enhancements. Council will then make recommendations on any changes, and staff will take those away and work on putting together the necessary Bylaws to make the budget a reality. By the end of the Tuesday special meeting, we should have a pretty good idea what our budget increase will look like for 2020, but looking at the reports, it will likely be something around 5%.

This Happened (v.4)

Posted on February 19, 2020. by Patrick Johnstone. Leave a comment.

I am really not good at keeping up with these, but here are a few things that kept me busy over the last couple of weeks.

Member of Parliament Peter Julian throws a heck of a Lunar New Year event every year, and this Year of the Rat was no exception. Being at the Nikkei Centre in Burnaby, it attracted more Burnaby folks than New West, but there were a bunch of cultural displays from around southeast and east Asia, mercifully short speeches from the elected types, and general good feelings all around.

The same day, New Westminster was able to cut the ribbon on one of our significant facility investments of the last few years: a new Animal Shelter in Queensborough. The old shelter was small and pretty, uh… lived in. The new shelter has enough capacity to accommodate the cats, dogs, and various smaller animals that find themselves abandoned in New West, and the dedicated staff and volunteers finally have appropriate workspaces to do their compassionate work.

The opening was really well attended with hot dogs (natch) cake, music, face painting, and tours of the facility. The Mayor and I both took our bikes to the opening, and enjoyed a QtoQ ride back on a cold but sunny day. It was good to see the service being used, even a few full boatloads. Not perfect for the few people has to wait 15 minutes for the next sailing, but a good sign for the popularity of the service.

The 2020 Push Festival included a couple of shows at the Anvil Centre, and I was able to attend one called “What you won’t do for love”. This was kind of a play with video montages, but more of a staged read-through of a play still in development. It was the story of David Suzuki and Tara Cullis, told in an engaging format centered around them telling vignettes from their history together at a dinner party. The themes were (of course) about life-long activism and conscience-raising about the environment, but it also talked about a relationship between two life loves, partners, and conspirators.

I have talked about David Suzuki and my mixed feelings about him before in a review of an earlier documentary about his life, and have been at events where he has spoken before, but I have never seen him act as vulnerable or deferential before as when he was sharing a table with Cullis. Perhaps their stories leaned a little heavily on the lateralization of brain function as a determinant of personality (ugh), but the conceit allows them to talk about how they rely on each other and work together. My mixed feelings aside, it was an interesting and informative event with a fair amount of emotional baggage attached, and the almost-full-room crowd was definitely engaged!

In the less performance category, there was a stakeholder workshop for the proposed Hume Park Master Plan. People from (mostly) Sapperton and identified user groups (Lacrosse, Rugby, HUB cycling, etc.) were asked about how they view Hume Park, what they would preserve, and what they would change. I am not a common user of Hume (though I ride my bike through it often!) so I was mostly there to listen and learn about what is most valued in the Park. I also learned that Fred Hume was not only the Mayor of New Westminster, but went on to be Mayor of Vancouver (though he lived in West Vancouver!), founded the radio station now known as 102.7 the Peak and the Vancouver Canucks, and is in the both the Hockey and Lacrosse Halls of Fame. Yikes.

We also had a series of consultations over the last couple of weeks on waste and recycling service. Not sure if you heard, but the recycling centre by the Canada Games Pool has to move to accommodate the construction of the new pool, which is anticipated to start in the next couple of months. This doesn’t mean the City is abandoning recycling, only that we are going to have to change how we deliver recycling. This consultation was meant to help staff understand what the main drivers of recycling are, and what barriers there are to recycling.

At the event I attended, there was a lot of discussion, some people disappointed about the movement of the current yard, some not that fussed about it, and mostly a lot of curiosity about things like collecting curbside glass or limits on green waste. I only wish the participation represented a more representative example of New West residents.

A few of us also attended the announcement at Pier Park that the main contractor has been hired for the Pattullo Bridge replacement project, which I already talked about here.

Aside from that, I had a couple of Task Force meetings, lunch with Councillor Dupont from Coquitlam to talk about Lower Mainland LGA business at a busy River Market, and a meeting over coffee with a couple of members of the New West Fire and Rescue service to touch bases on some of their opportunities and concerns.

I also got a couple of sunny bike rides in!

Two Bridges

Posted on February 13, 2020February 14, 2020. by Patrick Johnstone. 2 Comments.

A presser was called in New West this week to let people know that the design-build contract for the Pattullo Bridge replacement has been awarded, complete with a first rendering of what the bridge may look like. This is design-build, so expect that early renderings may be adjusted to accommodate the many competing demands and value engineering that the contractor will have to wrestle between now and ribbon cutting.

And then there are the political demands.

This conversation has gone on for a few years, but each new news cycle will require it to be told again. Such are our times. The City of New Westminster, the City of Surrey, and the TransLink (which was the responsible agency for the Pattullo) spent years doing planning and public consultation on the very question of what to do about the Pattullo. A quick scan of this blog finds that these conversations were happening back in 2011, and before I was elected I attended numerous public meetings, open houses, and community events (even dressed for the occasion on occasion).

At the end of that work, after all of those conversations in the impacted communities, an MOU was completed between the major stakeholders agreeing that a 4-lane bridge with appropriate ped/cycling connections was the appropriate structure to replace the aging Pattullo. Not everyone agreed, some wanted the bridge closed completely or moved, some wanted a 8-lane bridge and tunnel to Burnaby. If you look closely at the costume above, you will note it features a 3-lane refurbished Pattullo with a counter-flow middle lane, so there is my bias. Clearly, not everyone was going to be happy. As is usually the result if consultations are comprehensive and honest, the most reasonable result was settled upon.

The 4-lane bridge is the project upon which the Environmental Assessment and Indigenous Consultation were framed. It is the project that was taken to Treasury Board to fund, it is the project whose impacts were negotiated with the City at each end. It is the right size for the site, and it is the project that will be built. Re-negotiating those 8 years of consultation and planning now is ridiculous because nothing has changed in the principles that underlie that MOU.

Which brings me to this little news story. It is hard to tell where this is coming from, except for a zealous local reporter in Delta trying to put a local angle on a provincial news release. There is nothing new in this story, no new questions asked or answered, but a re-hashing of staff comments from 3 years ago.

With all due respect to the staff member quoted, those comments from early 2017 are now based on bad data, since the traffic impact issues raised were from before the removal of Port Mann tolls – which everyone in New West recognizes had a profound impact on Pattullo traffic. I have some data on that coming in a future post, but for now this is my (paraphrased) retort:

Of course, the Pattullo isn’t the only bridge Delta wants money poured into right now. The patently ridiculous 10-lane boondoggle project to replace the Massey Tunnel has been effectively shelved, but the province is currently reviewing other options. Unfortunately, the currently-leading option would be as expensive and no less boondoggley, doubling freeway car capacity to a low-density sprawling community that still resists the type of density or growth that would support more sustainable urban development, while somehow framing this entrenchment of motordom as a functioning part of a Climate Emergency response. This is a 1950s solution to a 1990s problem.

This is troubling climate denial, as Delta will certainly feel the impacts of climate change more than any community in the lower mainland, but I digress yet again.

The short news here is that Delta wants New West paved over and the people who live here to breathe their exhaust and walk near their speeding boxes. They also want the people of Richmond to pave over more farmland and have their community bisected by more freeway noise and disruption. If accomplished, they will (no doubt) be calling for the people of Vancouver to expand the already-congested Oak Street Bridge and the Granville Corridor and maybe a third crossing of the north arm because their suburban lifestyle demands it. And they want everyone else to pay for it, because tolls are “unfair”.

If this ode to motordom in the face of a Climate Emergency boggles your mind as much as it does mine, you can always let the provincial government know, because they are taking public comment on the Massey Tunnel Expansion Project right now. Go there, remain anonymous, and tell them what you think. I did.

Patrick Johnstone

Fan of cities; Mayor of a great one.

Tag: New Westminster