Asked by Anonymous · a month ago
Do you feel about the 5% tax increase to build another arena before we build a pool?
Peter Barbati
Councillor Ward 5
Pools are nice, but never pay for themselves. The 5% refers to the "arena build in one of the 3 options", not including a pool. Keep in mind that the 5% is on top of any other usual increase for any given year. The cumulative tax increase from 2022-2026 (inclusive) is around 27%.
Also consider that the p/i of the $46 million option (no pool) is about 2.8m per year. Then you add the operational costs and subtract the actual usage fee to arrive at the net cost, then add any repairs or depreciation. The cost to build is just one factor.
I believe we need to review the plan and instead of asking a service to offer a suggestion, we should come up with the requirements, with a FULL and comprehensive understanding of the actual costs, and then request a tender based on our acceptable budget.
James Dougall
Councillor Ward 1
I don't think building another arena was wise — we already have numerous rinks. If anything, we need an indoor public pool. And I don't want taxes to increase, so I'd fund it through development charges and grants instead of property taxes.
Wendy Gabrek
Councillor Ward 2
I had previously answered this question. Thank you :)
Laurie Mortimer
Councillor Ward 3
If I could only choose one, I would choose an indoor pool. I believe it would serve a broader range of residents, from children and families to seniors, recreation, therapy and competitive use.
But I don’t think that’s how we should be planning for a growing community. We have three important recreation projects to consider: the Beeton arena, an indoor pool and the field house.
I would have moved all three forward to the next steps so we could better understand the costs, funding opportunities and options before making final decisions.
We need to plan ahead for the whole community, while still being realistic about what taxpayers can afford and when.
This question doesn't really give the whole picture. Because it's important to also note a pool comes at even higher tax rate increase. But this does circle back, how do we find additional funding if we only move one of 3 projects forward and that's where previous council made an error in my opinion.
Tony Phekoo
Councillor Ward 3
This is a difficult choice as one option will upset one group, and another answer will upset another. However, as difficult as it is, decisions have the be made.
As I discussed the issue with constituents, the missing pool always comes up. Residents repeatedly noted how a year-round pool should have been included when the New Tec Rec Centre was originally built. Given the fact the prior council has already approved the arena, this question seems like a purely academic exercise. My view is I would have elected for the pool since New Tecumseth already has facilities available for all residents across Alliston, Tottenham, and Beeton. The pool would serve a larger demographic, including toddler swimming lessons, school safety programs, seniors and open public recreation. In addition, I do agree Beeton deserves a new arena as the existing one has run its course and is very costly to maintain. The broader question is what is best for New Tecumseth as a whole. The inability to access a pool forces families, seniors, and swimmers to travel outside the municipality or rely on private/seasonal alternatives. Having said that one cannot dismiss the impact a 5% increase and its demands will have on the already stretched taxpayer.
Chris Rapin
Councillor Ward 1
I think this question has been asked already.
Jason Shand
Councillor Ward 2
Yes. I do have concerns about a 5% tax increase to build another arena before we address the need for a pool. I believe we need to look carefully at our community’s priorities, affordability for taxpayers, and whether our recreation investments are meeting the needs of the whole community.
Jaison Waldman
Mayor
In the current economic climate I am not in favor of any increase in taxes. I do reserve the right to change my view if there is strong evidence that supports the need.
Perhaps someone could enlighten me on what makes this a pressing need. My limited view suggests that we are trying to honor a broken promise to appease part of the electorate.
Every taxpayers dollars are important and we should not burden the whole town with debt at the expense of what was a campaign promise of last century. Decisions should be made according to what services would stimulate the town and all residents.