Municipally run recreation programs are all fun and games until somebody has to pay for them. Then it becomes a war between those who use and those who do not.
Those who don’t use the services don’t want to pay any more because they’ve already paid their share through their taxes.
Those who do use them don’t want to pay more because that’s human nature.
They, too, have paid the subsidy through their taxes, but they’re also the ones who are causing the wear and tear, creating the need for the facility to be maintained.
Some would consider it fair that they pay for that wear and tear.
For residents in Springwater Township, it hasn’t been much of a topic of discussion over the past couple of years because the municipality’s recreation fees have been frozen.
That changed during the township’s most recent council meeting, when council voted to approve new recreation, parks and facilities fees, with the exception of facility rental fees, which will be studied further before any decision to increase them is made.
“I thought the idea was we were going to waive and freeze for a year,” Deputy Mayor George Cabral said when the topic came up on council’s agenda. “We’re into year two, so that puts us three years behind the 8-ball.”
According to Dean Collver, Springwater’s director of recreation, parks and facilities, the township initiated a process a couple of years ago to assess what full cost recovery of recreation programs and services might look like.
He said as that process was winding down, there was some concern that recreation fees were “irregular” to other fees in other departments.
It was suggested that staff review costs in context of what the market would bear.
“We conducted an assessment of the market and where we sit in the market, relative to other municipalities,” Collver told council.
In the report Collver prepared for council’s consideration, it was noted that while it’s difficult to develop solid comparisons with other municipalities regarding subsidy rates for specific facility operations, there is a common measuring stick — an annual report that provides high-level comparisons of service investments among Ontario municipalities that is created by BMA Management Consulting, a Hamilton-based firm specializing in municipal financial and management consulting.
“This report describes a (2023) Springwater recreation facilities cost per capita of $15 versus a study average of $80,” Collver wrote in the report, which included 101 comparator municipalities. “Expressed differently, Springwater’s expenses related to recreation facilities are approximately 81 per cent lower than the study average.”
Unlike other township services where user fees are applied, Collver said recreation and recreation facilities are understood to provide a social value that supersedes full cost recovery at an individual level.
“Affordability is a key consideration given that an overarching purpose of municipal recreation is the support of healthy communities,” he wrote in his report. “Research supports the fact that municipalities that support recreation across the socioeconomic spectrum tend to thrive in terms of overall livability and well-being.
“User fees are often identified as the No. 1 barrier to participation,” Collver added.
Collver’s report said economically, municipalities with a higher degree of participation in sports and recreation realized increased spin-off effects in support of local business and in property values. At the same time, recreation facilities are also expensive services for any community, so cost recovery considerations need to remain a significant part of the balancing of benefits.
Coun. Matt Garwood said council would have to decide which it thought was more important — providing residents with the facilities that lead a healthy and active lifestyle, or cost recovery.
“These are the two different sides of the same coin,” he said.
Collver said subsidies are a difficult concept because it forces council to draw a line in the sand to express in a percentage the value of its commitment to recreation.
He said market rate is a viable option.
“Break it down into two ideas — market rate and subsidy rate,” Collver told council. “Which is the idea we want to follow and what line do we want to draw in either one. Do we want to be in the middle of the market, or do we want to be at a rate that we can determine collectively?
“Breaking it down into those simple ideas may help the conversation and help you with your decision,” he added.
Springwater Mayor Jennifer Coughlin said it’s a difficult decision for council to make.
“We need to choose our level of investment, our level of subsidy,” she said. “It really comes down to a matter of what are we willing to put on the regular tax rate and what are we willing to put back to the end user.”
Township staff will develop a parks and recreation user fee guideline/policy with input from user groups, residents and stakeholders.
Municipal staff expect to present it to council midway through next year.