It is time for the proposed rural aquatic centre, (Times Chronicle September 28, 2022) to face a reality check. A capital cost estimate of $54 million plus a projected $612,000 annual operating deficit should turn on some serious alarm bells. Let’s look at these numbers and their impact.

Borrowing by local governments is done through the BC Municipal Finance Authority (MFA). On their website, the MFA publishes long-term lending rates which are currently 4.37 per cent for a typical 20-year debenture. Using the amortization schedules linked from the same page, borrowing $54 million on a 20-year term at 4.37 per cent results in an annual debt payment of $3,189,548.

The consultants also projected an annual operating deficit of $612,000. All factors I am aware of suggest that this has been underestimated.

For example, the existing Oliver Pool (scheduled to operate for 16 weeks in 2022) required a tax requisition of $260,387 to pay for revenue shortfalls. My first cut at a 52-week operating deficit should be closer to 52/16 times this amount, or about $846,000, and not $612,000. 

Operating through the winter months would also incur additional heating costs, well beyond what is needed at the existing pool. 

The Oliver Pool relies on student lifeguards, who are paid an average $19.57/hour in 2022 (CUPE contract). Penticton uses full-time lifeguards who are paid $24.10/hour or $24.78/hour when instructing (CUPE contract). Hence, moving to a year-round operation can be expected to add a further 23 to 30 per cent to hourly wage rates. Therefore, all-in, I suggest a more accurate annual deficit number would be closer to $1 million per year instead of the $612,000 hoped for in the report.

Realistically, I suggest the annual tax requisition for this facility will be approaching $4.2 million ($3.2 million debt payment plus $1 million operating deficit). What will this annual expense add to individual property tax bills? Let’s do a quick estimate.

In 2022, the entire Oliver Parks and Recreation operation required a tax requisition of $1.628 million from Oliver and Area C taxpayers. To pay for this, my residential property taxes were $524.75. 

So, if the aquatic centre annual requisition was $4.2 million and paid for by Oliver and Area C alone, my annual share would be $1,354 per year. If Osoyoos and Area A were to also share the costs, they would be approximately half this amount, or $677 per year. However, Area A and Area C are so far not willing to participate, so where would that leave the rest of us? In addition, the tax mill rate for businesses is between two and 2.5 times the residential tax mill rate. Do local small businesses want to pay this amount? Can they even afford it?

As part of the annual operating shortfall, the consultant’s slide show to council estimated annual “repairs and maintenance” at only $20,000/year. On a $54 million project, this amounts to only 0.037 per cent per year. There is no allowance included for sustainability costs such as building component renewals, replacements and refurbishments, which in the long run could be as high as 10 to 20 times this amount.

Costs aside, building a recreation centre in the middle of the ALR, 10 km from either municipality is ridiculous. Virtually all users will have to drive there. Parents dropping children off must either wait around or drive out and back twice. Adding 20 km to 40 km drive for each use is irresponsible and just wrong when we should be cutting energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. 

Think of all the other worthwhile things we could build and operate for a fraction of these costs: medical clinic to attract and retain family doctors, affordable rental housing to support businesses looking to hire new employees, sidewalks, second bridge across the river, etc. Perhaps even a roof over the existing pool. 

Finally, a new aquatic centre would most likely result in closure of the existing Oliver Pool. Is this what Oliver residents want? The consultant reported that 60 per cent of initial survey respondents were from Osoyoos and only 37 per cent from Oliver. To me, this suggests Oliver should maintain and improve its existing investment. Osoyoos and Area A can look at building their own facility.

This project needs to be properly costed out and the real tax impacts presented to the public before any further study money is spent on trying to justify its feasibility.

Tom Szalay, Oliver