From the City's Five Year Financial Plan:
Multi-Purpose Recreation Complex
The City took over the operation of the Rec Plex in March, 2007. Projected revenues in 2012 from the Rec Plex, including pool operations, are $957,250 Operating expenses are estimated to be $2,513,551 before debt payments of $1,619,441.
This means the Rec Plex alone costs the city $3,175,742 per year.
Much has been said about the imbalance between Arts and Sports facilities in Cranbrook. There is no doubt we need both but when this figure is compared to the fact that the total sum of grants issued to the Studio, Cranbrook Archives Museum and Landmark Foundation, Key City Theatre, Symphony of the Kootenays and Cranbrook and District Arts Council is $188,305 it is easy to see the imbalance is huge. The cost to the city for operating the Rec Plex alone is fifteen times the total cost of operating all these arts programs and facilities which cater to thousands of residents
It's time for The Arts!
Talk about a mayor and council being caught between the proverbial rock and hard place.
ReplyDeleteThe RecPlex, although much used, a fact to which I can attest as I visit the pool every day, at its cost to the taxpayers, is truly an albatross around the necks of city taxpayers. Perhaps it is time for council to appoint a committee to totally review the RecPlex operation and make recommendations for its future.
I am shocked at the paltry support the city gives to the Arts, although perhaps I shouldn't be as Cranbrook is not much different from other places where sports come first.
But, hope springs eternal, and hopefully this mayor and council will address the imbalance in a positive way. The success of the Key City Theatre for 20 years should be evidence enough of the demand for the Arts in Cranbrook.
There's no doubt that our sports facilities are a huge burden on Cranbrook's limited tax base but they're part of a healthy lifestyle we want to promote. That said, the Arts are important as well, so I support the proposed use of our abandoned Firehall as a future home for the Arts. The City owns the building and must maintain it as an important heritage landmark.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, I do not support the proposed 'Save the Armond' project. We definitely cannot afford both projects and the Firehall is a much higher priority. The Armond would only be another albatross around our necks.
I also believe the downtown Firehall project is a higher priority than adding another sports facility, i.e. the lacrosse field proposed for Balment Park.
If the Armond Theatre in a future capacity could be self-sustaining and potentially profitable, would you consider it an albatross?
ReplyDelete