qathet Regional District’s finance committee is recommending that grant funding for Lift Community Services’ Community Resource Centre (CRC) be valued at $50,000 from general grants-in-aid.
At the July 5 finance committee meeting, Electoral Area C director and board chair Clay Brander brought forward a motion to reconsider allocating the grant-in-aid after a motion to fund the CRC for $50,000 from the social planning service budget was defeated at the June 7 finance committee meeting, which carried unanimously.
City of Powell River director George Doubt said the CRC is a valuable service and saves lives.
Electoral Area B director Mark Gisborne said directors were told that when Lift approached the city for a grant-in-aid, the application did not meet the criteria.
“They have now come to the regional district for $50,000 in funding,” said Gisborne. “It’s not a small chunk of change. They did not apply to us for funding from the general grants-in-aid, which is paid for by everyone. The social planning service is only paid for by the electoral areas.
“The electoral areas are roughly a third of the population – two-thirds of the population are within the city limits. I find it very inappropriate to expect one-third of the population to pay $50,000 for the Community Resource Centre and the other two-thirds of the population doesn’t.”
City director Cindy Elliott said the city has offered a permissive tax exemption in the past and this year, the city asked for an accounting of Lift’s financial data. She said Lift could not meet the financial need for all its properties lumped into the application.
“I suggest if they want to zero in on properties that were not funded by the provincial government in the future and apply for just those ones, there might be a different response,” said Elliott. “It wasn’t because the city didn’t want to fund the Community Resource Centre.”
Elliott said the facility offers important services. She said she did not see how withdrawing funding and services from people who desperately need them is going to solve problems. She said she would be in favour of the city funding Lift but there is currently not a mechanism.
“For this year, if we can’t get the social planning envelope to fund this particular service, I would be in favour of moving it to general grants-in-aid, where we can participate,” said Elliott.
Brander said he recognized Gisborne’s concerns about funding. He said there may be potential changes in how the grant is given.
“What we need to do is focus on what we do and focus less on what the municipality is taking care of,” said Brander.
Negative impact
Electoral Area A director Jason Lennox said he had watched the CRC and it was quite apparent that there is some profound anti-social behaviour occurring at certain times of the day. He said he bumped into a staff member at Tourism Powell River, which is situated next door to the centre.
“They reinforced a lot of the negative things that are happening,” said Lennox. “They can’t have a picnic table out front because people start shooting up or burning things. The impacts are sobering.”
Lennox asked, however, if not supporting would help or hurt, and by most people’s feelings, it will hurt, he said, so he was reservedly prepared to support the motion. There is a lot of work to be done, he added.
Electoral Area E director and finance committee chair Andrew Fall said prior to the establishment of the social planning service in late 2018, the centre received grants via general grant-in-aid, including $25,150 in 2016, $30,150 in 2017 and $50,000 in 2018. He said in 2019, the regional district’s social planning service was fully functional and established and the resource centre grants were shifted to that service. From 2019 to 2022, the centre was granted $50,000, he said.
“This seemed to make sense, as the centre provides vital social services,” said Fall. “However, the shift in funding from general grants-in-aid to social planning has the side effect of shifting the cost entirely to the electoral areas. From a practical point of view, it makes sense in the future for this body to consider shifting the funding back to general grants-in-aid or finding some other mechanism to do that.”
Gisborne suggested an amendment to shift the funding to general grants-in-aid, which was seconded. Gisborne’s amendment carried with Brander, Doubt and Fall opposed.
Fall suggested that the matter be postponed until there could be further deliberation over other submissions vying for limited general grants-in-aid funds, as there was more demand than funds. The motion carried.
After discussing four other grant applications, discussion resumed on the motion to recommend to the regional board to fund the CRC from general grants-in-aid for $50,000. The motion carried, with Gisborne opposed.
