City of Vancouver Food Grant Allocation
Motion 9 · Special Board Meeting, April 20, 2026
Summary
- Directs staff to immediately amend the 2026-27 budget to reflect the full City of Vancouver food grant (up to $325,000) as soon as the city confirms the funding, rather than waiting for the formal amended budget process in February.
- The current draft budget includes only $162,000, representing the second half of a grant already confirmed for the prior year; no new grant has yet been confirmed.
- Passing the motion allows food program spending to begin as soon as grant funds arrive, getting food to students faster.
- Trustees also expressed support for ongoing advocacy toward a universal school food program.
Vote
In favour 6
Opposed 1
Abstained 1
Public comments
Read all 2 statements
Transcript
22 segments
We're on a roll now, so we might as well just push through, right? We can do it. So in 2020, 25, 26, the city of Vancouver's food grant of 325,000 was restored by unanimous decision by city council. And I would like to take this moment to thank the advocacy committee and also our chair who went to the city of Vancouver to push to get this grant restored. But the draft 2026-27 financial plan only shows that there's 162,000 applied in the plan because the 2027 grant has not been confirmed by the city of Vancouver. So what we want to do with this motion is to express our continued support for advocacy for the ongoing provision of the City of Vancouver Food Grant and to reflect the full amount in the 2026-2027 draft financial plan should the funding be confirmed. But I am hoping and crossing my fingers that this grant will be continued because I think there is appetite for supporting food to our needy students in Vancouver. In fact, I think this goes not far enough. I think the city of Vancouver should support us with more money because what we all believe in is a universal food program.
Trustee Fraser.
Thank you. I'm a little confused about when the city of Vancouver provided the money and when we allocated into our budgets. So maybe if staff could speak to that. Secretary Treasurer.
So funding was confirmed. The $325,000 was confirmed earlier this year. And it is funding that spans two fiscal years for the VSV. So in our amended budget for the current year for 25-26, we included half of the grant. And the other half is included in the 2026-27 draft financial plan because we have been told that there is no assurance that this grant is going to continue in future years. We have not included an estimate for a grant from the City of Vancouver in our draft financial plan. So we don't have the second part of the 325 included. And that would be included as soon as the city confirms that the grant is provided and is going to come with the corresponding expenses, depending on what the terms and conditions of that new grant from the city may be.
Do you have a follow-up trustee Fraser? Yes. Thank you chair. So the entire, $325,000 that the city did allocate to the VSB has been split over two financial years. And if the city of Vancouver gives another $325,000 grant, then we will apply that to our budget. But I'm not sure...
if the motion is needed, because if we get the grant, then we will apply it.
So what this motion does, it allows for the amendment of the budget before the formal amended budget process. So if the city of Vancouver was to announce the grant, let's say in the fall, that the budget would immediately be amended and the funds be spent in accordance with the grant stipulations. Otherwise the budget would only be amended during the regular process, which sees the budget being approved by the end of February.
So it's just a question of timing. If this motion is approved, then if the city of Vancouver approves their grant, then it can be spent immediately. Is that correct?
Okay. That is correct.
Trustee Richardson.
Maybe I'm still confused so that if we pass this motion and we all, everyone wants a universal food program. And one part of that step towards that is that the city continue the grant. and then we get other funding. But at this point, there's no need to fund it because this is just say directing staff that we will, because our budget is approved by the end of April. So if we haven't heard by then it's, is it not, it's cast in stone. And that if the city was of a mind to give us the additional money, we all do it in the amended motion. So I'm really not sure how this motion is affecting what we're doing, because we're affecting the budget that we're going to be asked to approve next Wednesday. I mean, this is aspirational and it's stating our hope that the city will continue to fund as they should.
I'm going to ask the superintendent to comment as well.
I'll have a try at summarizing what I've heard. There is a mismatch between the funding period of the city, their budget and our process, which is why you end up with the split funding between two years. They tell us that their grant is coming for a year. So currently what we know we have in hand is the current amount for the remaining half of the year, which is $162,000 approximately. If the city, so right now our budget, you can only budget for what you know you have, right? So we built in the revenue and we built in the expenses for that funding. If the city in the fall says, hey, your grant is being renewed for whatever dollar amount it is, we would need to wait until the amended budget process that happens usually in February, where all of you sit around the table, you look at where the financial position is, and you direct staff as to what the amended budget would be. and that would incorporate if there was new funds in. What this motion is doing is saying if the city announces funding in the fall, that staff have permission to move forward with the revenue that's being received for the new amount of grant and the expenses. So students don't need to wait to receive the support of this food funding until we get to the amended budget. Is that helpful explanation for folks in the summary of what has transpired?
I still see some confused faces. Let's put those faces to questions.
You're satisfied? Trustee Richardson?
I believe you that we, I mean, I will pass this because I'm hopeful that we'll get the money in September. I can't imagine if an outside donor gave us some money tomorrow, we couldn't use it tomorrow, but we would have to wait to the next budget. But maybe that's,
Is there, I would like to ask staff if there's any, if this motion were to pass, what are any ramifications of that to the budget or to students? Secretary, Treasurer.
At this moment, there will be no implications. It only gets enacted when the city confirms the grant.
So just to clarify, this motion is asking... that we do something that is already going to happen.
Okay, so I'm just as confused as Trustee Richardson. Please, please clarify.
So this motion only comes into effect when the City of Vancouver announces a new food grant. And Trustee Ma in the rationale for the motion noted the need for continued advocacy to the City of Vancouver for this to be realized. So this motion would not result in any changes to the financial plan as currently drafted. But if the City of Vancouver does announce a grant before we go to amended budget, we will actually enact this motion and immediately start utilizing the funds that are received from the city of Vancouver to provide food programs in our schools.
Thank you. So we'll be providing food at a more efficient rate based on this motion. Thank you very much. Clear. Okay. Any other comments before we close? Great. Trustee Ma.
Thank you. So hopefully everybody understands what's happening. I think it's important for us as a board to take a position and to say to the city of Vancouver, that we need this money and we need it as soon as possible and that we should be spending this money as soon as we get it because getting food to our students quicker is better than having to wait until February. So I would like to see this motion pass and get our advocacy group to start talking about the increased need to move towards a universal food program.
All those in favor? Okay, Trustee Ma, Richardson, Reddy, Chan, Pedley, Fraser and Young, those opposed. Trustee Chen, abstentions. Trustee Freedcoat. Okay, the motion has passed. We will now move to our last motion tonight, which is item 2.2.9. And I will ask Trustee Reddy to read it.
Thanks chair. So the motion I'll read from the screen is on page 15 of the agenda package that the board approved that any and all funding for students with disabilities or diverse abilities that is being spent on principals and vice principal salaries be redirected to direct classroom support for students with disabilities or diverse abilities. Any further increase in funding for inclusive education from the Ministry of Education and Childcare for the 26-27 school year be spent directly on classroom support, not administrators nor redirected to surplus.
Statement Watch
Thank you very much, Chair. And I'm going to pass it over to Patricia McNeil, Director, to give you an update on the engagement. Thank you. Thank you. The engagement summary report included in this evening's package and posted to our website outlines input we received to assist in the board's consideration of the 2026-2027 financial plan. Engagement activities were grounded in our education plan, the framework for enhancing student learning, and follow best practice standards by the International Association of Public Participation, or IAB2. Input was sought from inherent rights holders, stakeholder groups, students, families, staff, and the broader public through a mix of methods and activities. The engagement period was open from January 12th to April 16th and included multiple opportunities such as meetings, workshops, and discussions with inherent rights holders and former stakeholder groups, as well as written submissions to the board, an online survey, which was available publicly and to staff, as well as students, and last week's Committee of the Whole meeting and public delegation meeting. Trustees received a copy of all written submissions on a weekly basis, as well as a copy of survey responses in early March. An interim summary report was available that first week of March as well. The report in your package this evening is an update to that interim report to include information about input and feedback received since early March. Across engagement activities, participants highlighted priorities related to classroom staffing and supports, a focus on student learning and course offerings, as well as schedules, learning resources, student wellbeing and mental health, inclusion and equity, facilities and school or learning environments, as well as supports to student families. It's important to note that priorities raised through this year's engagement reflect patterns that we've heard through previous year's financial planning, and I would be pleased to take any questions trustees may have.
Statement Watch
ELLIE WILSON- Thanks for the question through the chair. Our resource teachers in schools provide a variety of services. I think sort of to your question, they're responding to every student's individual education plan, and those vary across the needs of all students. So there would be small group work, there's push-in support that happen in classrooms, and it's all directed by a student's individual education plan. So those folks coming into our schools would need to familiarize themselves with those individual education plans and get up to speed about how to implement that. Certainly our school-based resource teachers could leave weekly, I would say, detailed plans about how they're working with students, but those would be constantly evolving plans. And I think... A lot of our folks who are sick for a day or two don't necessarily have those very detailed, detailed plans that would provide guidance to somebody. Certainly someone who's gonna be away could prepare that to support the work.
Do you have a follow-up? Go ahead.
Thank you. So if a teacher is absent, a resource teacher is absent and there is a TTOC in place for that, they won't have the full information of those particular cases for those students. Is that correct?
Through the chair, that is correct. They would have to take a bit of time to learn how to do that.