Richmond Votes: Council candidate Laura Gillanders

By Laura Gillanders, Councillor

The Richmond News gave all municipal candidates the opportunity to answer our questionnaire in order to introduce themselves to voters. These will be published online from Sept. 28 to Oct. 8. 

Name: Laura Gillanders

Running for: City councillor

Slate/party affiliation: RITE Richmond

Home neighbourhood: Seafair

Profession: Chief financial officer / controller / city councillor 

Favourite hobby/pastime/leisure activity: Growing garlic, skiing, singing, Iyengar Yoga and sourdough

Why are you running?

I was elected in 2022 and would love another four years to continue serving the people of Richmond and see through some key community projects that we started, like the new covered multi-sport box. I love this city and think it’s the best place to live — the local pride and dedicated volunteer base give me the inspiration to make the best decisions for our city’s future.

Over the past four years, I’ve helped drive real accountability and progress by being creative: establishing a dedicated housing office, replacing the Olympic Oval board to cut high executive salaries and save taxpayers money and ending staff gift card use to prevent fraud. With at least four new council members coming on board, stability matters. I offer the experience, commitment and momentum needed to follow through on the bold initiatives that have been set in motion.

City council candidate questions

Candidates were asked to give yes/no answers to a series of questions. If they didn’t answer, it is indicated with “Candidate did not provide an answer.” They could also answer three questions with 150-word answers.

1. Is Richmond a safe place to live, work and play? Yes

2. Would you increase taxes to pay for more police officers and firefighters? Candidate did not provide an answer. 

3. Would you continue the city’s appeal of the Cowichan Tribes ruling? Yes

4. Do you support increasing reconciliation efforts with First Nations? Yes

5. Are new small-scale multi-unit housing (SSMUH) developments fitting into Richmond?
The SSMUH zoning was brought in by the province so we had no choice but to comply, but what Richmond did that other municipalities didn’t do is we kept restrictive heights, setbacks and FAR so that the new dwellings would fit in with the character of the neighbourhood. Initially we brought in very restrictive rules which made projects unviable and risked the province stepping in. Then our staff worked with SSMUH developers closely and found solutions like a slight increase in height, which allows for a usable, partial third storey to give families and builders more flexibility to bring liveable dwellings while not overwhelming the neighbourhood. We will see once some are built how they fit, but we know that we avoided some of the nightmares that other municipalities faced when they did not restrict the sizes and upset the neighbourhoods.

6. Should the city lower fees for developers to support faster housing development?Yes

7. Will you allow more City of Richmond-owned land to be used for affordable housing? Yes

8. Will you support continuing temporary modular housing contracts? Yes

9. Do you support adding more bike lanes in Richmond? Yes

10. Does the City of Richmond need to reduce traffic congestion? Yes

11. Do we need more buses in Richmond? Yes

12. Do you support lower property taxes in Richmond?

It’s important to me to keep our taxes low. I don’t believe it’s possible to lower taxes but we can minimize increases by finding efficiencies and re-evaluating programs. Part of our sound management is that one per cent of taxes go to the facilities capital budget and that number is steady and reliable. It lets us finance our own projects from reserves, not requiring unforeseen levies or tax increases to build a project we need; we just prioritize over five years what we need first and use that one per cent of tax to pay for it. It’s a challenge to keep taxes low with necessary cost of living increases for all the work force and operating budget impact needed for all the services we provide, but we must always consider it and make every sacrifice that we can for things that are not necessary to ensure tax increases are kept to a minimum.

13. Do you support more recreational facilities in Richmond? Yes

14. Will you increase funding for arts programming? Yes

15. Should Richmond have more taxpayer-funded free community events?

We have wonderful events and I believe connection is very important for the well being of our residents. However, taxpayer money being increased for events isn’t necessary right now and we may look for opportunity to re-evaluate some of them. We could use more events in the City Centre, north and east sections that aim to celebrate our multiculturalism and help bridge some of the separation we feel between different communities. We need to not always use taxpayer money to throw a party but can also look to support community groups that want to put on their own events, or events done through partnerships rather than solely taxpayer money. I do love the events and want them to continue. Yet, we need to keep in mind that we rely on those same limited surplus funds for other important initiatives that arise and we can’t take them for granted.

16. Do you feel Richmond gets enough support from seniors levels of government for housing, health and transportation? No

17. Do you support reducing environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs) on private property? Yes

18. Do you support allowing retail cannabis stores in Richmond? No

19. Do you support more industrial/commercial development along the Fraser River waterfront? Candidate did not provide an answer. 

20. Do you support the city creating more low-cost or subsidized commercial space for local entrepreneurs and startups? Yes

21. Should Richmond hold more public consultations before major infrastructure decisions? Yes