Days before Surrey’s controversial casino vote, the minister responsible for gambling called some city councillors with a warning: If they voted no to this proposal, they could forget about a new casino anywhere in Surrey.

Councillor Bruce Hayne, who voted against the proposed $100-million casino resort in South Surrey, said Minister Rich Coleman’s call was unusual but clear: “He let me know in no uncertain terms that if we turned down the proposal, the province and (the B.C. Lottery Corp.) would not be looking at another site in Surrey.”

Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts says it was inappropriate for Coleman to call councillors just days ahead of a public hearing into the proposed casino and, in a scathing letter to BCLC Thursday, she also blasted CEO Michael Graydon for what she described as inflammatory comments following Surrey’s 5-4 decision to reject a gambling license for the project, proposed by Gateway Casinos & Entertainment Ltd.

Watts said the actions by both Graydon and Coleman have shown a disregard for public process. Coleman also blasted Surrey council for rejecting the proposed casino and said B.C. won’t waste any more time looking to place a casino in Surrey.

“Why even have a process and engage the public on a gaming license if your expectation is that it should go through regardless?” Watts said earlier this week.

The mayor acknowledged Thursday that she was one of at least three members of Surrey council who spoke to Coleman ahead of the controversial public hearing, which began on Jan. 14 and wrapped up early Saturday morning.

Watts said she didn’t believe that Coleman’s call was a lobbying effort but noted, “it’s inappropriate to contact council members with those kinds of statements. It’s not OK because we have to make sure our process is open and transparent.”

Councillor Tom Gill, who supported the casino application, said Coleman was returning a call he had made to find out if Surrey would be able to put the casino in another location if the residents didn’t want it. He supported the project, he said, because he didn’t want to lose the $3 million-plus in revenue from the project.

“The purpose of the call was to clarify BCLC’s intent in Surrey,” Gill said. “I was trying to determine what level of opportunities existed. It was quite clear it was South Surrey or nothing.”

Coleman was not available for an interview Thursday but said in an email the province’s policy is to never put a casino in an area that doesn’t want it and he respects Surrey’s decision.

“I am always open to discuss projects and answer questions for issues falling under my ministry, which is what I did in this case. That will not change,” the email states. “I respect Surrey council’s decision and want to personally thank them for taking the time to consider the opportunity.”

But NDP MLA Shane Simpson said Coleman should have had a staff member call Gill and the other councillors if his intent was to provide information.