Another long Council meeting as we have a lot of work to get done before the Summer Break, and we had a long agenda. I’m going to break this report up into two parts, and in a break from traditions start with second half of the meeting, where Council deliberated on no less than five Motions from Council:
Development of a Public Commemoration Policy and Exploration of a Punch McLean Tribute at Queen’s Park Arena
Submitted by Councillor Fontaine
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council direct staff to report back with a draft policy framework for the consideration, approval, installation, and maintenance of statues, monuments, and other commemorative works on City-owned property;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT Council authorize staff to engage with the Punch McLean Legacy initiative (Punch McLean Foundation) to explore the feasibility, scope, and potential parameters of a commemorative installation at Queen’s Park Arena, including but not limited to design considerations, siting, funding, community consultation, and long-term maintenance implications;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT staff report back to Council with findings and recommendations arising from this engagement following development of the draft policy frameworkwithin 90 days.
This follows on some community advocacy and recent news regarding Punch McLean’s passing. I really appreciate the way the motion was drafted, as it wisely puts the policy discussion in front of the specific, and I think that this is a policy gap in the City that might be a valuable thing for the community to engage in. We had a marking in this meeting of Elmer Rudolph’ passing, and have seen recently the loss of some other high-profile folks in the community, and we really don’t have any kind of structure to discuss even the simplest memorial. I’m not comfortable with this kind of thing coming down the politics or likes/dislikes of the Council of the day, but should have some way of bringing the community into the discussion. So I definitely support the first first clause on policy development.
On the second section Council was a bit split, but I think that there is a legitimate community-led initiative here, and I appreciate our need to respond to that. I support having staff engage with the community proponents, and that itself may be a useful in helping inform some of the policy work.
Finally, the third clause has a strike-though part (Councillor Fontaine agreed to remove it recognizing that with Mr. McLean’s passing, there is less urgency now), as we generally don’t concentrate this type of public engagement in the summer, and I think we want to give staff some space to engage with the community on this. It occurred me after that the bigger monument strategy might be a good topic for the Community Advisory Assembly, and it will be hard to have a meaningful engagement in the 90 day time period. The next step will have staff report back to us with a framework in the next few meetings as is practice for motions from Council, and give us a practical timeline then.
Local Government Climate Action Funding
Submitted by Councillor Campbell
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT UBCM call on the Province of British Columbia to immediately renew and continue direct to local government climate action funding as a long-term, predictable and noncompetitive program at funding levels no less than current levels.
I’m removing the whereas clauses for brevity here, but in short, the Province has not renewed funding to the Local Government Climate Action Program – a program through which New Westminster received $800K in the last round of funding. This baseline funding for local governments provides important support to climate action across the province in exchange for local governments demonstrating they are doing the work and reporting out there progress transparently. Baseline funding that is effective, accountable and transparent. Who can oppose this?
Indeed, back in 2021 when the Province looked to cancel the previous “CARIP” (Climate Action Revenue Incentive Program) funding model, it was advocacy led by communities like New Westminster to UBCM that shifted their mind, and brought in a better LGCAP model. It seems we need ot take up that fight again, and remind Province that their own independent CleanBC review completed last year recommended they “Continue to support local governments as key partners and contributors to CleanBC’s success… and extend funding for the Local Government Climate Action Program (LGCAP) and continue collaboration”.
So we are taking a resolution to UBCM.
Creating an Indigenous-Led, Cross-Sector Housing Alliance
Submitted by Councillor McEvoy
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the UBCM call on the Province to establish an ‘Indigenous-Led, Cross-Sectoral Housing Alliance’ composed of senior representatives from the health, justice, social services, and housing sectors, with strong and equitable urban, rural and northern Indigenous representation;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the mandate of this alliance include the development of a provincial framework recognizing safe and adequate housing as essential infrastructure, and to coordinate sector-wide adoption and public endorsement of this position by professional, service, advocacy, academic, and industry associations and their member agencies.
This is another motion for UBCM resolution, and another that resulted directly from community activism. Indigenous people are way overrepresented in the unhoused population province-wide, and right here in New Westminster, while barriers exist for much affordable and supportive housing for indigenous people. Assuring we are building appropriate housing that proactively addresses this is not only the right thing to do, it will save governments money in the long run, but requires an interagency response that would benefit from a roundtable or alliance model within government, and includes key non-governmental partners working in this space. Council unanimously supported taking this call to UBCM.
Calling for a Cumulative Health Impact Assessment of the BC’s LNG industry
Submitted by Councillor Henderson
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT New Westminster supports the call for an independent, cumulative health impact assessment of BC’s LNG industry by sending a letter to the Minister of Health, the Minister of Energy and Climate Solutions, and local First Nations requesting that this assessment be completed before any further expansion of LNG facilities or infrastructure in the Province, and include a resolution to UYBMC to this effect.
We received a considerable amount of correspondence in regards to this motion, and had a series of local residents delegate to Council asking us to join other communities in British Columbia (from Dawson Creek to Squamish) in calling for or this basic assurance that long-term health effects of this rapidly expanding industry are being evaluated and taken in to consideration in the government subsidizing its growth. The stories of unanticipated flaring impacts in Kitimat and unassessed upstream impacts from fracking and leakage deserve at least a response from government as we seem to be institutionally putting all our chips in the LNG pile. I expect this will be fractious debate at UBCM and seen as an attack on a safe industry, bereft of the analysis that a safe industry should have nothing to fear from such an assessment.
Restoring Funding for Road Safety
Submitted by Mayor Johnstone
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that UBCM request that the Province of British Columbia immediately reinstate the BC Active Transportation Infrastructure Grant Program and improve it to provide stable, long-term funding to support local governments in delivering safer streets and reduced climate impacts across the province.
This was another surprise out of the 2026 Budget. Local governments have been calling for years for increases in this important baseline funding program, and in the last few years, it appeared that was the direction the Provincial Government was going. I even provided a keynote at the Active Transportation Summit a couple of years ago in part celebrating the potential of this expansion. Alas, budget 2026 includes a pause of this funding. Or a re-pacing, maybe.
New Westminster has been a successful recipient of these grants to a tune of more than a million dollars in recent years, it provided important baseline funding to the Agnes Greenway and other projects. But when you see the list of projects in municipalities large and small across the province that this program has supported, it demonstrates that Active Transportation investments can be cost-efficient when local governments are empowered to deliver them – the entire Program cost the Province $130 Million over the last 10 years, but delivered more than 400 projects. That means upgraded sidewalks, multi-use paths, bike lanes, and safer active transportation in communities across BC. Compare that to $140 Million being the amount they spend on a single highway overpass project.
The notice of cancellation/pause/re-pacing on the Provinces webpage states this is “due to the independent review of all CleanBC programs,”. However, in reading that review, it clearly states “Develop a sustainable funding model to ensure sustainable funding to support investments in increased active transportation and public transit use., as this funding PALES in comparison to the amount spend on even a single highway overpass project”.
So we are taking this fight to the UBCM again.
There you go, five resolutions, all passed, generally collaboratively. You can draw your own conclusions on what it means when the self-described “back to basics” “lets concentrate on core services” member of Council was the one asking for a statue, not the one addressing climate action funding, affordable housing, public health care, or active transportation.
I will get the rest of the Council meeting out in a report in the next day or two.