14 February 2012 CSS meeting

The following are some thoughts of an interested observer of the above meeting regarding the new fee structure for Guelph community centres.
1. Revenue
Purely based on my own calculations, I estimate that the decision to scrap the three frequent user passes will result in a loss of $80,000 to $100,000 (221 pass holders X up to $459 per pass). Surprisingly, none of the usually cost conscious members of City Council at the meeting raised the issue of how this lost revenue would be made up. As a taxpayer who at the same time is being pushed out of the recreation centre by high fees, I am concerned that my taxes will be used to make up much of this loss. I sincerely doubt that those paying individual fees will be making up the difference, even with the higher individual fees starting in April. When this issue next comes before City Council or the CSS, I hope that Council members will press this issue.
2. Capacity
The best question/comment at the 14 February meeting was posed by Councillor Bell, when he asked about excess capacity at the recreation centres. Implicit in this question was a challenge to the notion that there was room only for so-called a la carte users or for an all-inclusive pass system, and not both. From eight years of observation at the Victoria Road Recreation Centre (in the mornings only) I would argue that there is plenty of room for both – that the pass holders do not need to be pushed out to make room for the a la carte users. I have seen capacity strained at VRRC only in two instances. In one, the land fitness classes, the classes were simply moved to a larger unused room, solving the problem and leaving lots of excess room in the fitness room; in the other, children’s swimming lessons for eight weeks in the summer have made for a crowded but tolerable situation for water jogging classes. If the latter situation becomes intolerable, it could be solved simply by cancelling water jogging for those eight weeks. At the moment there is lots of room for both types of participants at VRRC.
3. South End Community Centre
There is a nasty rumour circulating among some observers that raising the recreation fees is a ploy to end any pressure for the South End Community Centre. By reducing use of the existing community centres (so the rumour goes), pressure for building any new Centre would be obviated. I do not myself believe such conspiracy theories, but Council would be well advised to take some sort of action to allay this sort of fear.
4. Fee Assistance for Adults
A small number of VRRC users have commented that the higher fees could not be afforded by those people on low incomes. Some of these people have had fitness programs prescribed by their doctors. I have seen no evidence that there is much or any awareness of the city program for fee assistance. I urge the city to develop some ways of making the program of fee assistance better known among city residents.JS