We now know how much money New West is going to be getting from the provincial government’s $1 billion Growing Communities Fund. (GCF)

On Friday—a couple of weeks after making the initial announcement—the BC government affirmed in a follow-up news release that cities would be receiving money based on a formula that begins with a $500,000 base fund.

Factoring in adjustments for the growth of the population from 2016 to 2021—based on BC Stats data—New Westminster will be getting $15,850,000 from the province.

For comparison’s sake, here’s what some other municipalities are getting:

• Vancouver: $49,119,000

• Burnaby: $28,784,000

• Surrey: $89,928,000

• Victoria: $12,852,000

As we reported on Thursday, March 2, the province will give guidance about how the money will be transferred to municipalities by the end of this month.

“All local governments are required to report on the use of funds in their annual audited financial statements. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs will provide further guidance to municipalities and regional districts on the use of their funds in the coming weeks,” the release from the BC government reads.

GCF discussion spills into the online realm

The GCF was a brief point of discussion during a council workshop on Feb. 27. During that meeting, Coun. Daniel Fontaine presented a motion that asked for a number of additional or enhanced expenditures for the city’s capital projects.

At the time, how the GCF would be disbursed had not been announced, though The Anchor did reach out to the province to ask about how and when the money would be passed along—that’s when we were told the city would be contacted about the “how” by the end of this month.

During the discussion, Couns. Tasha Henderson and Nadine Nakagawa said they couldn’t support the motion: Henderson noted that council didn’t know at the time how much money it would be receiving, while Nakagawa said she would prefer to talk about how the GCF would be distributed in a collaborative way.

After the motion was defeated 5-2 (opposed by Mayor Patrick Johnstone and Couns. Ruby Campbell, Jaimie McEvoy, Henderson, and Nakagawa)—the New West Progressives—the slate that Fontaine and Coun. Paul Minhas ran with—put out a press release entitled, “Community First Votes Down NWP Funding Request For New Sidewalks, Paved Roads And Community Festivals In New Westminster.” Campbell, Nakagawa, Henderson, McEvoy, and Johnstone all ran with the Community First slate.

Along with outlining the potential expenditures, the release said it was “anticipating feedback … from colleagues regarding the merits of the proposed expenditures. Only two Community First councillors were allowed to speak before Community First councillor Ruby Campbell said, ‘call the question.’”

To “call the question” is a procedure in Robert’s Rules of Order—the rules by which New West council meetings function.

After Henderson and Nakagawa spoke, Campbell said she agreed with her colleagues—this is when Campbell called the question, with the call receiving support from all but Fontaine and Minhas.

“I can’t express in words how concerning it was to bring up ideas in a workshop only to be unceremoniously shut down without even having an opportunity to speak,” Minhas said in the same NWP statement. “Community First talks a good talk about wanting to be collaborative, but they have an interesting way of showing it.”

On Thursday, March 3, Campbell tweeted, “Yes, I called the question because I support being fiscally responsible rather than spending money we haven’t received yet and may not receive.”

Mayor Johnstone also wrote a response on his blog, with the piece titled, “On Fiscal Responsibility.”

“The motion that was defeated at Council arrived at the eleventh hour of that months-long budget discussion, and comprised a long list of disconnected funding items. Together they represented something like $8 Million in new spending that was not discussed in previous budget deliberations, though that number is uncertain, because the funding was requested without any actual costing, testing for viability, or understanding of the impact on work plans or the ability to deliver. It was an expensive wish list tacked onto the end of a budget, ballooning it by something like 5%, with no consideration for how this fits into any existing priorities. This is not good governance,” he wrote.

Johnstone also took issue with the quote in the NWP release that said colleagues were not being collaborative.

"Collaboration in my mind means working together to evaluate each other’s ideas and finding compromise and places of agreement, it does not require the capitulation to all ideas regardless of how poorly they are presented. The job of those seven people around that table is to govern, and the hardest part of governing is in setting priorities, including deciding when to say no,” wrote Johnstone.

“I find this extra disingenuous in that these debates are framed as being partisan, with the implication that council members are acting for partisan reasons only. This implication is disrespectful to the intentions and professionalism of the council members. It also is not reflected in the voting record over the last few months.”

New Westminster is poised to spend $166 million on an assortment of capital projects that range from sidewalks to streetlamps, and the new aquatic centre—among other things.

At the Feb. 27 meeting, the city’s chief administrative officer, Lisa Spitale, chimed in to provide advice regarding allocating an amount of money that, at the time, hadn’t been confirmed.

“My experience also with provincial funding is it … may have other conditions that we’re not aware of yet. It isn’t prudent for the treasurer or myself to get ahead of that until we understand what the province’s expectations are,” added chief administrative officer Lisa Spitale. “Once we understand that, our practice then is to bring that to council, and seek direction.”