City Council Gives Out Another $75,000 For ????

on

COUNCIL APPROVED THE MONEY—NOW IT WILL FIND OUT WHAT TAXPAYERS BOUGHT

Affordable housing is a worthy goal. It is not a blank cheque.

Nanaimo City Council has approved another $75,000 for the Nanaimo Prosperity Corporation and its partners to pursue an affordable-housing initiative that proponents say could eventually produce as many as 400 homes priced 40 per cent below market value.

That sounds impressive.

Unfortunately, council does not yet appear to know precisely what the $75,000 will purchase.

TO CONTINUE READING — CLICK HERE

Councillor Ben Geselbracht said that, with the contribution approved, city staff will now speak with the various collaborators and return with clear deliverables showing what the money will be used for.

Should that not have happened before the money was approved?

In responsible procurement, council first defines the work, establishes measurable deliverables, considers qualified alternatives and then authorizes the expenditure.

In this case, council approved the money and will apparently work out the details afterward.

TRUST IS NOT A SPENDING POLICY

Mayor Leonard Krog acknowledged that he was not convinced the initiative would produce real progress. Nevertheless, he supported it because he was placing enormous trust in people involved whom he knows.

That may be an honest explanation, but it is not a reassuring one.

Councillors are not investing their own money. They are spending money collected from Nanaimo taxpayers.

Public funds should be awarded on the strength of a defined proposal—not personal familiarity with its proponents.

Councillor Ian Thorpe also expressed reservations. He said council needed assurances that specific deliverables would be approved before proceeding any further.

But approving the first $75,000 is already proceeding further.

Councillors Tyler Brown and Sheryl Armstrong voted against the grant.

Brown argued that the city should use an open process allowing this group—and anyone else with relevant expertise—to propose how such a housing-delivery system could be developed.

That would have allowed council to compare ideas, costs, experience and expected results before selecting an approach.

That sounds remarkably similar to good governance.

WHAT IS NPC’S EXISTING FUNDING FOR?

The Nanaimo Prosperity Corporation already receives approximately $665,000 annually from the city.

Its base funding was increased by another $149,000 in the 2025 budget.

NPC’s stated role includes generating ideas, leading collaboration, solving problems and bringing business, government and community partners together.

Those sound remarkably similar to the activities for which another $75,000 has now been approved.

Why can NPC not pursue this initiative using the $665,000 taxpayers already provide each year?

Perhaps there is a good answer. If so, council has not made it clear to the public.

NPC should have been required to explain what work the additional money will purchase, why it falls outside the organization’s existing mandate and why the project cannot be accommodated by reprioritizing its current budget.

THE CONVENIENT $75,000 NUMBER

The Housing Nanaimo Working Group originally requested $300,000.

City staff advised that providing that amount directly would be inconsistent with the city’s procurement policy because services costing more than $75,000 require a competitive process.

The contribution was subsequently reduced to exactly $75,000—the maximum amount that could be awarded without that competition.

That does not prove anything improper occurred.

It does, however, create the appearance that the amount was determined by the procurement threshold rather than by a detailed calculation of what the proposed work would actually cost.

When a proposal is reduced from $300,000 to $75,000 and proponents say they can somehow make it work, taxpayers are entitled to ask whether either figure was based on a genuine budget.

FOUR HUNDRED HOMES—OR ANOTHER PLANNING EXERCISE?

The public headline is that this initiative could produce up to 400 below-market homes within two years.

But the city’s $75,000 is not purchasing land, financing construction or guaranteeing a single housing unit.

It is funding preliminary coordination, organizational development and exploration of a possible housing-delivery model.

Important questions remain unanswered:

  • Where will the homes be built?
  • Who will provide the land?
  • Will these be rental homes or privately owned homes?
  • Who will qualify to rent or purchase them?
  • Who absorbs the promised 40-per-cent reduction?
  • How will affordability be protected over the long term?
  • What financing has actually been committed?
  • What happens if no homes are produced?

Most importantly, what measurable result must NPC deliver in exchange for the $75,000?

Affordable housing is a serious need. That should demand more scrutiny—not less.

Council has not funded 400 homes. It has funded another attempt to organize people around a housing concept, with the deliverables apparently still to be determined.

Taxpayers should not merely be asked to trust that something useful will emerge. They should be told what they are buying before the cheque is approved.



Comments

Post a Comment

Thank you for your input. Your comment will appear once reviewed.