There’s been some interesting chatter on the Richmond News Facebook page following our story regarding the fact city council has come up with a sum it thinks Onni should contribute towards community amenities in order to have its site at the Steveston boardwalk rezoned.
Some (many, actually) say the total of $5.5 million is too low. Others say, “whatever, we’re sick of empty buildings. Take the money and move on.”
However, Bob Ransford, who often comments on building policy, notes the city may be wading into dangerous waters because, technically, it should not be “selling” zoning. He writes that according to the Local Government Act, it is illegal for the city to request a payment to have property rezoned, although it can ask for a contribution for “bonus density.”
It’s an interesting point, but whatever we call it, I don’t think it’s news to anyone that much negotiating happens when a developer requests rezoning and much of that negotiating involves money.
The part of the story I found most interesting was the question of a donation. Onni suggested that instead of paying the $5.5M, it would pay $4.75M and then donate $500,000 to two charities ($250,000 each.) That would bring the total to $5.25M, spitting distance from the city’s request.
A number of the councillors were deeply offended by the offer — and for good reason.
We hear a lot about “giving back to the community,” and, for sure, that’s a nice thing to do. This is the donation season, and we should be thinking about giving to the food bank or toy drive.
Large corporate donations, however, have a double-edged sword. For one, a good chunk of that donation will be returned to said corporation via a tax credit. But, more importantly, big donations have a habit of swaying public opinion and can be used to leverage control; it’s the old he-who-pays-the-piper-calls-the-tune thing.
As individuals, we have every right to pick the causes we want to get behind, but it’s quite another thing to replace a city fee with a corporate donation.
It’s the job of public officials to spend the money they collect through taxes, fees, etc. in the best interest of the community at large. It’s not the job of corporations to make those decisions.
Not only did Onni suggest making a donation, it specified which charities it wanted to donate to. Bringing third parties into the mix is a great way to “put pressure on council,” as Coun. Derek Dang said. “If we don’t agree, the third parties don’t get those donations, and we look like the bad guy.”
In fact, Loren Slye, past president of the Steveston Historical Society, one of the two charities named, showed up at an earlier public hearing to speak in support of Onni. He has since been clear that Onni never tried to “buy him.” In fact, it was he who went to Onni with the suggestion of a donation. And I appreciate Slye is trying to save the historic post office at the Steveton Museum, a worthy cause.
Still, bringing the issue of donations into a public and contentious debate about fees, is problematic.
I may not like all the decisions city council makes, but I do like the fact those decisions are being made by people I can elect — or not.
