"Is your ultimate goal to stay a renter forever?"
It was a question asked by Brian Hughes, one of several residents concerned about the direction of the District's plan to rent, rather than own a new municipal hall.
Hughes, a retired lawyer, said it was probably safe to say most people aren't interested in the idea of being perpetual tenants, but that's what may soon become the District of Squamish's new reality.He's not the only one concerned. Both a former chief administrative officer and a former mayor are questioning the District of Squamish's decision to lease a new municipal hall, rather than build one.
Grant McRadu, who previously served as CAO for a number of municipalities, including Squamish, and former mayor Patricia Heintzman are among those who feel the municipality is making the wrong move."Does leasing the city hall make economic sense? I have yet to find anyone that says yet," McRadu told The Chief.
"That makes no sense. Why are you renting? You'll always need a city hall…After 40 years? What've you got? Nothing. You've got no equity in this thing."While the group says they don't have all the answers, they're calling on the municipality to have a community-wide visioning process and to seriously consider the idea of joint ownership with other entities like the school district, Vancouver Coastal Health, or others to cut down costs and build an innovative public-owned facility.
In September, District staff recommended that instead of building and owning a new municipal hall, it would be cheaper to instead lease a new building for that purpose.For some time, the current municipal hall has been identified as being at the end of its life.
To address this, staff were asked to examine potential solutions, and leasing was the step they wound up recommending.Though it's estimated to cost close to $1 million a year, they argued that this was the cheapest of options. It would not affect the municipality's ability to borrow money, no land would have to be sold to pay the extra bills and it would not delay high priority projects like the much-demanded makeover of Brennan Park Recreation Centre.
On the other hand, the group of residents believe that this is the equivalent of throwing away $1 million for years or even decades, while having nothing to show for it at the end of the day.In contrast, McRadu, Heintzman, Hughes and another local, Bob Brant, maintain there are other ways to pay for a new municipal hall building without breaking the bank.
The cost can be significantly cut down by partnering with another organization to share the cost.On top of that, there's a big opportunity for that right this moment.
The Sea to Sky School District sent a letter to the municipality expressing interest in a shared space. Like Municipal Hall, the school district building is at the end of its life and an alternative is needed.SD48 board vice-chair Cynthia Higgins wrote to The Chief saying they had inquired to the District about this matter.
"The Board of Education sent a letter, dated November 17, 2021, to the District of Squamish expressing interest in creating a joint facility. At this point, we have not received any official response to our letter, and we will be sending a follow-up letter detailing our interest in working together," she said in an emailed statement.In response, the District of Squamish told The Chief: "This letter was received by the District of Squamish. Throughout the Real Estate and Facilities Master Plan process, the District has reached out to numerous potential partners and identified potential opportunities to explore. Work is still in progress with all prospective partners, and discussions remain confidential at this time."
McRadu said in his time working with other municipalities, joint facilities have been used as a solution.He and Hughes said there are other cost-cutting measures the District can do. For example, in addition to splitting the bill with the school district, they could also build the new hall on school district lands, such as the big bus depot downtown, where space can be cleared out for a facility.
They could even go as far as building the municipal hall into the public works yard facilities, which is already slated for upgrades anyway. There's also the possibility of upzoning municipal land to increase value, and selling at least some of the air rights, he said.There are also other potential local partner organizations, McRadu noted, like Vancouver Coastal Health, among others.
He pointed to the success of the Under One Roof facility in downtown Squamish, which was a collaboration between a number of non-profit organizations and government, and asked why a similar model couldn't be considered for municipal hall.McRadu noted that there's a big opportunity to also reshape what we think of as a municipal hall. He noted there's an ongoing trend for North American municipalities to turn their city halls into community hubs with public plazas, food and recreation amenities.
He pointed to Lake Oswego, Oregon, as one example following this trend."Make it something this town can, 20 years from now, can look back with pride and say, 'We made a huge change in this town,'" said Hughes.
"Instead, we're going to get a...building...that at the end of [the lease], they're going to say get out, or pay us more money."A long-term lease like this could last decades, McRadu and Hughes noted.
Heintzman told The Chief it was a unique chance."I think there is a golden opportunity to create a very unique and beneficial community hub with both DoS and SD #48 needing new administrative offices," she wrote in an email to The Chief.
"This type of synergy doesn't come around very often."One point of frustration, said McRadu, is that by choosing to lease a new municipal hall, the District is capable of bypassing the alternative approval process, therefore stifling residents' ability to stop the project.
According to government regulations, municipalities have been required to hold a vote to obtain elector approval for loan authorization bylaws since 1873.Essentially, when a municipality is making a big spend and needs to borrow cash for it, an alternative approval process is triggered, allowing residents to vote against the motion. If a certain portion of the population votes against it, the motion is taken to an official vote.
However, in this case, that isn't happening."A lease is considered an operating expense and does not trigger an Alternative Approval Process (AAP)," wrote District spokesperson Rachel Boguski in an email to The Chief.
She added that the lease is not imminent."It's important to emphasize that including municipal hall in the Five-Year Financial Plan is a placeholder. Prior to making a final commitment, the lease payment would be considered through the public budget process, and the actual payment would not occur until later years within the Five-Year Financial Plan."
Boguski also had responses to several other concerns that were brought up by the concerned residents.She said as of now, the current leasing decision does not preclude the possibility of joint ownership with an entity like the school district.
"If the District uncovers a partnership opportunity that requires ownership and is superior to leasing, that could be considered by council at a later date," Boguski wrote.She added that the decision to lease was a placeholder in the upcoming budget and was chosen as a result of a staff analysis.
"The analysis completed during the Real Estate and Facilities Master Plan (Section 4.3.1) identified there is a limit to the amount of borrowing capacity and capital the District can raise (through dispositions) to support future facility investments," she wrote."The $1-million estimate for the Five-Year Financial Plan is an estimate based on current market
conditions and a projection out several years when payment under a lease would commence. It's important to note that the District has not yet solicited any formal proposals."
She also added that a lease would not lock the District in as a tenant forever, and other options can still be explored during that time."Furthermore, a purchase could be later be pursued once other priority upgrades have been completed," Boguski wrote.
"At this point, it is premature to determine the true extent of potential cost-saving from partnering, though it is expected that owning a municipal hall facility will still require a significant amount of capital (land dispositions) and borrowing capacity from the District that will impact the District's ability to advance the Brennan Park and Library projects."With respect to what might happen to the current land where municipal hall sits in the event of a move to a different, leased facility, she said that such a decision has not been made yet. It would be part of a separate decision-making process.
