Date:

Monday, July 18, 2011

Place:

Anderson Room

Richmond City Hall

Present:

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie, Chair

Councillor Linda Barnes (4:03 p.m.)

Councillor Derek Dang

Councillor Evelina Halsey-Brandt

Councillor Greg Halsey-Brandt

Councillor Ken Johnston

Councillor Bill McNulty

Councillor Harold Steves

Absent:

Councillor Sue Halsey-Brandt

Call to Order:

The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:02 p.m.

MINUTES

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on Monday, July 4, 2011, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT

1.

Richmond Community Safety Building Public Art Project

(File Ref. No. 11-7000-09-20-112) (REDMS No. 3250033)

A discussion ensued between members of the Committee and Eric Fiss, Public Art Planner, about the details of the proposed public art, in particular, the proposed signage and the salmon sculpture proposed for the grassy mound located on the south.

It was moved and seconded

That the revised concept proposal and installation of the Richmond Community Safety Building Public Art Project “The Coat of Arms” by artist Glen Andersen, as presented in the staff report from the Director, Arts, Culture & Heritage Services dated July 5, 2011, be approved.

The question on the motion was not called, as further queries were made about the concept for the proposed salmon sculpture.  Reference was made to a sculpture purchased by the Sports Council in 1988, depicting three salmon.  A suggestion was made to give consideration to a theme that incorporates three salmon.  Staff were directed to liaise with the artist regarding the suggestion.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED.

2.

City Grant Program Review

(File Ref. No.) (REDMS No. 3245549)

A discussion ensued between members of Committee and Social Planner, Lesley Sherlock about:

§                 

keeping grant amounts in line with Cost of Living increases;

§                 

the amount of grant funding allocated to Arts, Culture and Heritage in Richmond in comparison to amounts allocated in other cities;

§                 

the pros and cons of multi-year grant cycles; and

§                 

the establishment of an arms-length City Grant adjudication panel.

It was moved and seconded

That:

(1)

the City Grant Policy (Attachment 6) be adopted;

(2)

the revised City Grant Program (Attachment 7) be implemented on an interim basis until specific guidelines are prepared for the proposed (1) Health, Social & Safety, (2) Arts, Culture and Heritage, and (3) Parks, Recreation and Community Events City Grant Programs;

(3)

staff propose the following Casino revenue allocations to City Grant Programs be considered during the 2012 budget process:

(a)

Health, Social & Safety, $536,719;

(b)

Arts, Culture and Heritage, $100,000;

(c)

Parks, Recreation and Community Events, $96,587;

(4)

staff report back, following implementation of the 2012 City Grant Programs and prior to implementation of the 2013 City Grant Program, regarding;

(a)

stakeholder consultations regarding the new Policy and Programs;

(b)

the establishment of an arms-length City Grant adjudication panel; and

(c)

possible impacts of the Social Planning Strategy on the Health, Social and Safety Grant Program.

(5)

staff explore the development of an information technology system whereby City Grant Program applications, including Attachments, may be submitted on-line.

The question on the motion was not called, as the motivation for the establishment of an arms-length City Grant adjudication panel was questioned.  It was noted that the suggestion for such a panel had originated from the Richmond Community Service Advisory Committee (RCSAC).  As discussion continued, it was noted that the City had previously tried the ‘arms-length’ approach to giving grants, and had found the method ineffective. 

Discussion ensued about the advantages and disadvantages of an adjudication panel, and it was noted that the current process administered by staff was very effective. 

As a result of the discussion, the following amendment motion was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That Part 4(b) - the establishment of an arms-length City Grant adjudication panel, be deleted.

The question on the amendment motion was not called, as comments were made about how an independent body may be beneficial to the grants process, as it would provide a different perspective since it would be comprised of Richmond residents, who are familiar with issues in the community.

The question on the amendment motion was then called, and it was CARRIED with Cllrs. G. Halsey-Brandt, and Johnston opposed.

The question on the main motion was not called, as the following amendment was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That the Casino revenue allocations to Arts, Culture and Heritage be increased to $175,000. 

The question on the amendment motion was not called, as concerns were expressed about such a large increase to a program in its first year.  A suggestion was made to add the words “including the appropriate amounts for each category” to the referral in Part 4(a) of the motion rather than increasing the amount. 

The question on the amendment motion was then called, and it was DEFEATED with Mayor Brodie, and Cllrs. Dang, E. Halsey-Brandt, G. Halsey-Brandt, Johnston, McNulty and Steves opposed.

The question on the main motion was not called as the following amendment was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That the words “including the appropriate amounts for each category” be added to the end of Part 4(a) of the motion.

CARRIED

The question on the main motion, as amended to read as follows:

That:

(1)

the City Grant Policy (Attachment 6) be adopted;

(2)

the revised City Grant Program (Attachment 7) be implemented on an interim basis until specific guidelines are prepared for the proposed (1) Health, Social & Safety, (2) Arts, Culture and Heritage, and (3) Parks, Recreation and Community Events City Grant Programs;

(3)

staff propose the following Casino revenue allocations to City Grant Programs be considered during the 2012 budget process:

(a)

Health, Social & Safety, $536,719;

(b)

Arts, Culture and Heritage, $100,000;

(c)

Parks, Recreation and Community Events, $96,587;

(4)

staff report back, following implementation of the 2012 City Grant Programs and prior to implementation of the 2013 City Grant Program, regarding;

(a)

stakeholder consultations regarding the new Policy and Programs, including the appropriate amounts for each category; and

(b)

possible impacts of the Social Planning Strategy on the Health, Social and Safety Grant Program; and

(5)

staff explore the development of an information technology system whereby City Grant Program applications, including Attachments, may be submitted on-line.

was then called, and it was CARRIED.

3.

CITY ONLINE FORMS AND THE PREVIOUS ONLINE EVENTS APPROVALS SYSTEM FUNDING REQUEST FROM 2010 APPROPRIATED SURPLUS

(File Ref. No. 01-0340-30-CSER5) (REDMS No. 3240995)

Alan Cameron, Director, Information Technology, and Jason Kita, Manager, Enterprise Team, were available to answer questions.

Committee members made comments about how the detailed analysis provided in the report had assisted them in making an informed decision regarding the matter. 

It was noted that staff who are involved with the process related to surplus allocations and additional levels should be mindful about how the level of detail provided to Council/Committee members may impact their ability to justify funding of such matters.  It was emphasized that more detail is preferred in future reports related to surplus allocations.

It was moved and seconded

That the $60,000 being held from the 2010 Surplus Appropriation be allocated to fund the development of an online Event Approvals system.

CARRIED

BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT

4.

Social Financial Hardship Assistance Fund

(File Ref. No. 03-0900-01) (REDMS No. 3238492)

Venus Ngan, Manager, Treasury, was available to answer questions.

A discussion took place about:

§                 

staff’s rationale for recommending a Social Financial Hardship Assistance (SFHA) loan to the Canadian Mental Wellness Association of Canada (CMWAC), despite the CMWAC’s failure to meet the requirements for obtaining a loan from the SFHA Fund; 

§                 

concerns related to the CMWAC’s ability to re-pay the loan within six months, as the status of CMWAC receiving external grant funding was unknown;

§                 

how the SFHA loan would provide CMWAC with an opportunity to focus on improving its long-term sustainability through re-positioning itself with new partnerships, expanded membership and increased fundraising; 

§                 

how the CMWAC has received BC Gaming Grants annually over the past few years;

§                 

the repercussions in the event the CMWAC is unable to pay the loan.  It was noted that the loan is interest-free for a term of six months.  Upon the six months, the CMWAC may request an extension, however an annual interest rate of 2.0% compounded monthly will be charged on the loan from the day the fund is dispersed, and will be carried forward for as long as the CMWAC is solvent.

Committee members expressed concerns about the kind of precedent approving the SFHA loan to the CMWAC would set, as the CMWAC does not meet the criteria for such a loan.

Concerns were also expressed about the possibility that re-payment of the SFHA loan may impact the CMWAC’s ability to remain solvent.  Whether a SFHA loan was the most appropriate mechanism for assisting the CMWAC was also questioned, and a suggestion was made that a loan funded by the Council Contingency Fund may be a more appropriate.

It was moved and seconded

That an interest-free loan of $9,000 from the Council Contingency Fund to the Chinese Mental Wellness Association of Canada, with full repayment to be made to the City six months subsequent to the advance of the loan, be approved.

The question on the motion was not called, as questions were raised about any advertising requirements prior to dispersing the funds to the CMWAC from the Council Contingency Fund. 

Staff were directed to provide the following information prior to the next Regular Council meeting, scheduled to be held on Monday, July 25, 2011: (i) legal and advertising requirements; (ii) confirmation of the amount of funds in the Council Contingency Fund; and (iii) further details about the CMWAC and its activities.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED with Cllr. G. Halsey-Brandt opposed.

5.

RICHMOND CHILDREN FIRST

Councillor Linda Barnes advised that Richmond Children First was a community organization in Richmond seeking staff assistance in making a presentation to Council regarding the Richmond Children’s Charter and the organization’s work to date. 

A brief discussion ensued, and it was agreed that it would be appropriate for Richmond Children First to make a presentation perhaps at the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Committee at its meeting on Thursday, July 21, 2011. 

6.

SCOTCH PONDS

It was moved and seconded

That staff report back on the status of Scotch Pond including future plans, community initiatives and an update on any activities.

CARRIED

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (5:08 p.m.).

CARRIED

Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee of the Council of the City of Richmond held on Monday, July 18, 2011.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie

Chair

Shanan Dhaliwal

Executive Assistant

City Clerk’s Office