Skip to content

Editorial: Funding follies

When Friends of Powell River appeared before City of Powell River committee of the whole recently and asked for free recreation passes for youth in poverty, council missed the opportunity to do the right thing, no questions asked or red tape necessar

When Friends of Powell River appeared before City of Powell River committee of the whole recently and asked for free recreation passes for youth in poverty, council missed the opportunity to do the right thing, no questions asked or red tape necessary.

Instead, councillors suggested the child-poverty reduction group make a similar presentation to Powell River Regional District as an opportunity to continue a larger discussion about regional recreation funding.

Two days later, at its regular meeting, city council did give the Friends $750 to put toward buying passes, but the optics that the city cares more about political manoeuvring than its underprivileged youth had already been established. It’s not true, but it looks bad.

Powell River is a caring community and there is no doubt our city council reflects that caring nature, but work needs to be done to prioritize community requests. Council has to find a way to be less reactionary, measure the funding requests it receives and spend more time deliberating on them. This is a glaring area for improvement.

On paper, complex passes have value and put a draw on staffing and resources at the recreation centre, which is already running on a deficit of approximately $2.4 million per year, but providing free access to the recreation centre for youth from families below a certain income level would be an important program that could easily be set up.

Most families who could benefit from free passes would not be able to afford them in the first place, so there would be no significant loss of revenue. This kind of program wouldn't need a set funding base and could be established well in advance of any form of regional recreation funding.

Meanwhile, while only $750 is being given out for a proven need in the community, a $2,500 grant-in-aid was used to fund a Sea Fair Parade that was poorly organized and never happened (fret not, this money will be returned).

And in times of fiscal restraint, $5,000 from a separate reserve fund was used to buy stainless steel water bottles to give away at events and sell to complex patrons. So the city will have a stockpile of water bottles, but only $750 to give to youth who need help now.

It is time for city council to thoroughly analyze its funding requests, carefully prioritize them and make sound decisions that benefit the community the most.

-Jason Schreurs, publisher/editor