Formal Public Input - Medical Clinic with Pharmacy and 2025 Budget

Last night, Langley City Council held two formal public input opportunities.

The first was a public hearing to receive feedback on a proposed rezoning that would allow a medical clinic with an accessory pharmacy at 20334 56th Avenue. Langley City’s zoning bylaw prohibits new pharmacies within 400 metres of an existing pharmacy, and this proposed medical clinic with an accessory pharmacy would be located within that distance. You can read more about this in a previous post. Langley City Council received four letters from local pharmacy owners regarding this rezoning. Their primary concern was that the proposal would be a full-service, retail pharmacy. Some suggestions in the letters included restricting the pharmacy’s use to clinic-based dispensing, preventing the development of stand-alone retail operations, ensuring access to the pharmacy is available only via the medical clinic, limiting the pharmacy's footprint, and limiting signage, among other suggestions. At the public hearing, the applicant noted that they would limit the pharmacy's footprint to about 1,076 square feet and would consider additional restrictions. Of note, former City Mayor Ted Schaffer expressed his opposition to rezoning, and former City Mayor Peter Fassbender expressed his support for the rezoning at the public hearing. As this was a public hearing and per BC Law, Council is no longer able to receive any further feedback on the proposed rezoning.

Langley City Council also provided a formal opportunity to provide feedback on the 2026 - 2030 Financial Plan. Two people provided their input. The Greater Langley Chamber of Commerce always provides feedback, and this year was no different. They ask that Langley City Council find further ways to reduce the budget, such as by reallocating end-of-year surplus to ongoing operating costs or eliminating unfilled staff positions. Another resident had a specific question about the proposed increase in solid waste costs for 2026 and also asked about reallocating end-of-year surplus to ongoing operating costs.

The use of surplus comes up from time to time, which is why Council adopted an “Allocation of Operating Budget Surpluses” policy last year. The short of it is that year-end surpluses are directed into our reserve account for one-time capital projects. The following excerpts are from the policy:

The City does not budget for a deficit or plan for surpluses. The City shall adopt a balanced budget whereby operating revenues are equal to operating expenditures for each year.

Operating budget surpluses represent one-time funding that, by its nature, cannot be relied on to recur on an ongoing basis.

As operating budget surpluses are non-recurring in nature, they shall not be applied to the following year’s operating budget to fund ongoing expenditures, and/or to reduce the following year’s tax rate.