Ingredients

• 1 tbsp olive oil
• 3-4 shallots, or 1 small red onion, diced
• 6 cloves of garlic, minced
• 1 tsp miso paste
• 1/2 – 2 tbsp red pepper flakes, to preference
• 2 x 16 oz cans of chickpeas, drained & rinsed
• 1 cup heavy cream
• 1 cup chicken or vegetable broth
• 2 tbsp nutritional yeast
• 1 tsp corn starch
• 8 cups baby spinach
• 1 lemon, juiced
• Black pepper & salt, as needed

Instructions

1. Heat the olive oil in a large skillet or saute pan over medium heat. Once heated & shimmering, add shallots or onions and cook for 4-5 minutes until softened and translucent. Add garlic and cook for 1-2 minutes, stirring frequently to avoid burning.
2. Stir in miso paste and red pepper flakes. Cook for 1 minute to allow flavours to bloom.
3. Add chickpeas, stir to coat them in the aromatics, and cook for 2-3 minutes while stirring often.
4. Pour in heavy cream and broth, then stir in nutritional yeast. Bring to gentle simmer over medium heat, stirring occasionally.
5. Combine corn starch with roughly 1/2 cup of warm water to form a slurry, then stir in. Reduce heat to medium-low and let simmer for 15-20 minutes, until the chickpeas are soft and no longer mealy. Stir occasionally.
6. Add spinach to pan in handfuls, stirring each addition in. Continue until all the spinach has wilted.
7. Stir in lemon juice.
8. Remove from heat, taste, and season with pepper and salt if needed.

Best served with a crusty bread.

Notes

• 1 tbsp of red pepper flakes is about right for us for heat level, but if you like a little more spice add more. If you don’t like the spice, drop this down.
• In addition to the lemon juice, you could zest the lemon and add that for more lemon flavour.
• To make this recipe vegan, substitute the heavy cream with a vegan alternative. Try blending silken tofu, or maybe full-fat oat cream. No guarantees though, we haven’t tried this. Oh, and obviously don’t use chicken broth.

This counter-opinion is published in response to the stupid NYTimes article titled “Opinion | Did Liberal Feminism Ruin the Workplace?” that I won’t link to because it’s fucking stupid.

There will undoubtedly be millions of pixels devoted to complaining about 28% or 35% or 81% property tax increases over the last three years by certain anti-tax blowhards, so I figured I’d help put property taxes in context using numbers.

Specifically, the numbers I’ll be using are the exact property taxes we’ve paid for our townhouse in New Westminster over the past nine years.

In 2016, the first year we paid property taxes in New Westminster, we paid $1,264.73. In 2025, nine years later, our property tax bill is $2,415.42, nearly double! This works out to a yearly increase of 7.53%. One year our property tax went up 15.5%, another year it actually went down 1.07%, this year they went up 2.71%, but on average our property tax increased 7.53% each year.

Over those nine years we have paid a grand total of $17,983.23 to the City of New Westminster in property taxes.

But hang on a second. Property values have changed quite a bit over those nine years as well. In 2016, our property was assessed at $370,000. This year our assessed value is $858,000, much more than double! One year it went up 33%, another year it went down 0.61%, but if you average it all out, our property’s value has increased 9.6% each year. Compare that to our yearly property tax increase of 7.53%, would you?

And let’s talk about absolute dollars too. Remember that we’ve paid nearly $18,000 in property taxes in nine years. In the first year we owned our house, its assessed value went from $370,000 to $494,000. In one single year our net worth increased by $124,000 without us having to do anything. In nine years it’s increased by $488,000 and we’ve only had to pay $18,000 in property taxes. Don’t forget, that $488,000 is pure profit because we live in the house, if we sell it we don’t pay any taxes on it.

In other words, in one year we made nearly seven times as much money on our house than we’ve paid in property taxes over nine years we’ve lived here.

So next time someone complains that property taxes are rising too fast, remember the bigger picture: tax bills have grown, but property values and untaxed wealth have grown even faster.

January 27, 2025. New Westminster City staff return a report to Council describing proposed changes to the Council Travel and Expense Policy to make travel by members of Council more transparent, requiring them to write a summary of their travels, include the expenses incurred, describe their learnings, amongst other things. The motion passes, and this time Councillors Daniel Fontaine and Paul Minhas vote in favour, but the motion would have passed regardless of how they voted.

January 29, 2025: New West Progressives claim success, saying “thanks to your NWP representatives on Council, we’ve made some real ‘progress’!!”

Also January 29, 2025: I write a blog post pointing out how Patrick Johnstone brought forward the initial motion that got the ball rolling, how Daniel Fontaine and Paul Minhas of the New Westminster Progressives voted against the motion, how city staff did the work between July 2024 and January 2025, and how in January 2025 Daniel Fontaine and Paul Minhas of the New Westminster Progressives took credit for it despite doing nothing but vote at the last possible step.

Re: Should the City of New Westminster commit to ending homelessness? (Dec. 12, 2024)

It was incredibly disheartening watching the council workshop where council discussed the Interim Housing Needs Report on Dec. 9.

Shockingly, Coun. Paul Minhas asked if the police have programs to slow “so-called transients” from moving to New Westminster.

It is absolutely appalling that a city councillor would even think that police should be in the business of deciding who gets to move to our city.

We live in a society where people are free to live where they like, not in some police state where only the select few are allowed.

I ask Mr. Minhas: what did you mean when you asked if the police have programs that would “address this issue”? How do you see the police addressing the issue of homelessness?

And then, Coun. Daniel Fontaine votes down the housing needs report because it doesn’t list the number of units it would take to end homelessness.

Let’s be honest here, the number of units doesn’t matter to Mr. Fontaine because he would vote against them anyhow.

After all, he’s already voted against provincially funded projects that would help our unhoused neighbours get off the streets and into beds or homes. He says he wants to end homelessness, yet his actions suggest otherwise.

Luckily, the adults in the room voted in favour of endorsing the Interim Housing Needs Report.

Thank you to Mayor Patrick Johnstone, Coun. Ruby Campbell, Coun. Jaimie McEvoy, and especially Coun. Tasha Henderson for showing compassion and empathy, and understanding what our city needs to move forward to help everyone find housing in New Westminster.

The development in question (88 Tenth Street — Columbia Square) would bring up to 3 million square feet of residential units. It also includes 122,000 square feet of retail. Additionally, there would be at least 42,000 square feet of commercial office space, plus some daycare and potentially a school. Let’s say 3,250,000 square feet of development, just to round things off.

During the meeting Councillor Fontaine didn’t clarify which World Trade Center he was talking about, the most famous being the complex in New York City that was tragically destroyed by terrorists in 2001. Vancouver has a World Trade Centre building near Canada Place, perhaps he meant that one?

But he clarified in a Facebook video after the meeting, stating very clearly he was referring to New York’s World Trade Center.

Here’s the problem: his math is completely wrong.

If you assume that by “world trade center” he means either 1 WTC or 2 WTC (these are the “twin towers” that were struck by airplanes in 2001), then he’s wrong. Each tower had a square footage of 4,759,040 square feet. Four “World Trade Centers” would then be over 19,000,000 square feet, nearly six times the size of the 88 Tenth Street redevelopment.

If 88 Tenth Street were really “four World Trade Centers” then it would have to be six times larger than it actually is. It’s not even one World Trade Center, let alone four.

Or maybe he was referring to the entire World Trade Center complex of seven buildings? Problem: seven buildings are way bigger than one building, and their total square footage was 13,400,000 square feet, so four of those would be a whopping 53,600,000 square feet, well over sixteen times bigger than 88 Tenth Street.

Either way, “four World Trade Centers” is wildly incorrect.

Daniel Fontaine needs to remove his video and say he was wildly incorrect with his “four World Trade Centers” statement before it catches on as some sort of warped “truth”.

The timing for the meeting was strange, as on September 2 the City of New Westminster had just closed an online survey about the 2025 budget. Two days is nowhere near enough time to collate feedback and make any sort of informed discussion or decision about the 2025 budget. The 2024 budget’s preparation cycle had council workshops happening in the fall, which is where they look at the public feedback, the various proposals from staff, and work out what the budget will look like when they vote on it in February.

When the meeting happened, Ruby Campbell and Tasha Henderson questioned the agenda, asking for more information about what the meeting was going to be discussing, because all they had was the “2025 Budget: Tax Rate Proposal”. Apparently a motion was emailed to them at 4:02pm (note that the meeting was scheduled to start at 4pm), but this motion has not been made public on the City’s website, so it is still unclear what they were going to be discussing. (Update: the motion now appears on the minutes for the meeting.)

During the discussion about approving the agenda, it came out that Paul Minhas and Daniel Fontaine called the special council meeting, which they’re allowed to do under the legislation that dictates how city councils in BC operate. At no point during the discussion about approving the agenda did either Fontaine or Minhas provide any sort of clarifications about what the agenda was going to be and what they wanted to discuss during the meeting.

The motion to approve the agenda was defeated, and the meeting was subsequently adjourned.

Shortly after that Fontaine took to Facebook to complain that his “legal right to debate” was denied (it wasn’t, the meeting he called was still held), and that it was “completely undemocratic” (which is a weird way to say “they voted to not approve the agenda in a clear and open vote”). He then posted what he says is the “motion that was not permitted for debate”, a motion that has yet to appear on the City of New Westminster’s website or in any official document. (Update: the motion now appears on the minutes for the meeting.)

This is one of the cheapest political stunts Fontaine has pulled in his time as an elected official. He very easily could have presented this motion on August 26 so they could debate it at the September 9 regular council meeting. This would have given council, staff, and the public ample time to digest his motion and collect any sort of supporting information they may need to discuss and debate it properly. Instead he called a special council meeting (which is his right, and his right to do so was in no way infringed) with only a year and four words to go off of (“2025 Budget: Tax Rate Proposal”), said absolutely nothing while the rest of council was trying to figure out what was actually going to be discussed, and then after the rest of council votes in favour of not discussing something incredibly vague, he ran off to Facebook to “issue a statement”.

Politicians like Daniel Fontaine are why people get fed up with politics. His stunt does absolutely nothing to serve the residents of New Westminster. Why didn’t he present a notice of motion for this like he’s done in the past? Why did he keep the motion secret up until the very last minute? How do the residents of New Westminster benefit from this?

Let’s discuss property tax rates, sure. Are they too high? Are they too low? Sure, let’s have that discussion. But we have to be informed about what we’re discussing. “2025 Budget: Tax Rate Proposal” is not something anybody can have an informed discussion and debate about. The entire budgeting process is designed to provide as much information as possible, which is why it takes about eight months, from community engagement starting in June to the final approval of the budget in late February / early March.

Calling a special meeting to discuss “2025 Budget: Tax Rate Proposal” with no other information is the completely wrong way of doing this. It has zero information to go off of, nobody can prepare anything to discuss because it’s so vague. Daniel Fontaine has been through two budget cycles now, he knows very well how the process works, he knows exactly when this sort of discussion happens (it happens during the council workshops — which are open to the public! — between October and January). And yet he decides to drop this in. Why?

All this does is get Daniel Fontaine’s name in the news again, stirs up outrage among his supporters, and makes everybody else roll their eyes. This is the latest — and lowest — in a sad string of stunts. If Fontaine really wants to make a name for himself, he should quit with the self-aggrandizing stunts that only serve the interests of Daniel Fontaine and start acting in the interests of the people of New Westminster.

Here’s what she should have said:

I apologize fully and without reservation for what I did. I apologize for the harm I have done, and will be undergoing a period of self-reflection, therapy, and other assistance so that I never act in this way again. I will be offering my resignation to the New Westminster board of school trustees and withdrawing my membership from Community First effective immediately.

Instead she made excuses related to “chronic pain and mental health issues”. Guess what, people live with chronic pain and aren’t dickbags. People live with mental health issues and don’t set up fake accounts and run them for years in a campaign of harassment. Using those as excuses show that she personally doesn’t apologize for her behaviour, instead pushing them off to medical conditions as if they aren’t actually her.

I hope Dee Beattie gets the help she needs. I also hope that during this healing process she comes to the realization that her behaviour was caused by her, not by her mental illness or chronic pain. Triggered by chronic pain or mental illness, perhaps, but ultimately those are a part of who she is, and her behaviour is the chief problem, not the chronic pain or mental illness.

Given the amount of press Vancouver’s Stanley Park received when it had a bunch of coyotes roaming around it, do you support introducing more coyotes into New Westminster’s parks, potentially entering a Tourism / Parks partnership for tourist-coyote meet-and-greet programs?

I’ve participated in the coyote education program at Stanley Park, and I do think that would be good to bring to New West.  Regarding introducing more coyotes, they seem to be quite prolific in that regard themselves, and don’t need my help.

Improving connections between Queensborough and mainland New Westminster is important. Will you commit to exploring new options such as draining the Fraser, installing catapults (free branding advice: name them “Qatapults”, you’re welcome), or advocating for a gondola like stupid Burnaby is getting?

Given that the Fraser Users Group would only be happy if our Queensborough connection was far up in the sky, I think a heliport is in order on both sides.  We could have a mini-copter for the small stuff, like getting your groceries or a cup of coffee to Queensborough.

Speaking of stupid Burnaby, one of the darkest chapters in New Westminster’s history was when south Burnaby claimed independence and separated from New Westminster. As a result, New West lost nearly half of its land area and tax base. To what lengths are you willing to go to in order to take our land back and bring New Westminster back to its former glory?

South Burnaby didn’t actually  separate from New Westminster.  There is often confusion between two historical areas, same-named but not the same:  New Westminster City and New Westminster District.  Kind of like the two North Vancouvers, but New Westminster was under provincial authority and never had an elected government.  But it was New Westminster’s finest land speculators, who, I believe in 1890, created Burnaby, to avoid having the city of New Westminster grow and begin property tax in that area.  In regard to your question, the Local Government Act and Community Charter do allow for parts of existing municipalities to claim independance, like White Rock separated from Surrey long ago.  It also allows for areas like neighbourhoods to initiate referenda to switch which municipality they belong to, so….  I believe a sufficiently mischievous crew with enough energy could, in fact, initiate a successful campaign to take any one of our suburbs.  It would only take a small number of us to move to Brownsville or Annacis Island.  Resistance would be futile.

By the way, New Westminster district never disappeared, it still exists, but only  as one of the districts of the Land Title Authority.

What is your favourite bubble tea shop and flavour?

I can’t drink bubble tea, I’m diabetic.  I used to drink it, and I like mango, rose, and jasmin in that order.

Do you support hosting a local version of Burning Man in New West, culminating in the burning of a derelict building?

…  

I support the city getting a fire boat of its own or in conjuction with other muncipalities, and initiating a sprinkler program in older buildings.

What is your favourite neighbourhood and why is it (still) Brow of the Hill?

I lived in the Brow for most of the time in New West.  It had affordable rent (compared to other places), a great multicultural vibe, and shopping I could walk to.  My current neighbourhood of Ginger Drive is kind of like Brow of the Hill East.  Queens Park is surrounded.

With New Westminster’s hills, and winters having longer cold spells, what is your position on improving transportation options between Downtown and Uptown by installing rope towlines on 6th, 8th, and 10th Streets between Carnarvon and 4th Ave during the winter months?

In one of the Nordic countries, they have a simple lift, you just put your boots in it, and it takes you up the hill.  As it is, I’m still trying to get TransLink to put snow tires on the 106.

When will you bring metal to the Anvil Centre theatre?

I’m all in favor of metal at the Anvil Centre.  I once sprained my neck head banging and had to go to the doctor (I then had hair down to my waist.  Now it barely can cover my head).  The Anvil Centre would be a great place for something metal.

Thank you Jaimie!

And don’t forget to go out and vote!

With NWSS finally built and opened, what school do you see the province neglecting to tear down and replace for the next fifty years?

Neglect of schools by the province is a ghost that we will vanquish.  See below.

Council will soon be introducing coyotes to New West parks in what many are calling a misguided effort to boost tourism. Okay, it was all my idea, they’re not actually doing that. But if they do, what do you feel is the optimal coyote-student ratio for our school grounds?

New West Schools:  A coyote in every class!

With a 50% success rate on names for new schools built in the past few years (hits: Qayqayt, Skwo:wech; misses: Fraser River, New Westminster), what will you do to improve this rate?

Can’t joke about this one – meaningful engagement with Indigenous communities is a must.

One thing my daughter learned at a New Westminster school is that New West is one of the most haunted cities in Canada. I’ve asked this question before but that was an election and a half ago so I’m asking it again: who would be three people to join you as Ghostbusters?

I choose Nadine Nakagawa because she is fearless, Elliott Slinn because he can catch the ones up high, and Ruby Campbell because she knows EVERYBODY (including ghosts, no doubt)!

We all know that school space is at a premium, and buying new land for schools is expensive. Will you support the hostile takeover of City Hall to turn it into a new school? 

Let’s stick with Simcoe Park but use City Hall as the playground!

Thank you Cheryl!

And don’t forget to go out and vote!