It looks like the debate over recreational funding between the Town of Barrhead and the County of Barrhead might not be over after all.
At the Aug. 14 Town of Barrhead council meeting, Associated Engineering told councillors that the town’s curling rink needed more than $700,000 of improvements over the next several years.
Among the most pressing items is a new roof and exhaust fan at an estimated price tag of $595,000. The engineers believe the roof that has been the main cause of the condensation problem that has plagued the building and its users for the last two years. The question is who will pay for these repairs and how.
For the most part, the question of who is obvious. Since it is the town’s building, they are responsible for the upkeep and the associated costs, although the blow will be somewhat cushioned by the provincially-mandated arbitration recreation agreement they have with the county.
Under the agreement’s terms, the county contributes an annual bulk amount based on a percentage of its total taxable assessment, which is earmarked for the core operating expenses of the Agrena, Aquatics Centre and curling rink. Depending on the year, the percentage varies between 0.03403 and 0.03404 per cent and that it will never drop below $312,679.
The problem comes when it no longer makes economic sense to continue to try to maintain an aging structure.
Town of Barrhead Coun. Ty Assaf is right when he said the town and county have to start thinking seriously about what to do when that time comes and it’s either time to replace or bulldoze the facility. The good news is that there is time.
From best estimates, the building is closing in on its 50th birthday. Associated Engineering says if the town follows its recommendation and embarks on a more structured maintenance program, the curling rink’s life could be extended for 25 to 30 years.
However, as we all know, time has a way of sneaking up on you, so we suggest that the town and county come up with a procedure for splitting costs if they decide to eventually replace the building, because ratepayers from both communities don’t want to see a repeat of what they saw leading up to the replacement of the aquatics centre.