Kelowna's proposed $288M recreational facility upgrade draws criticism from some residents

The City of Kelowna is facing criticism from some residents over its proposal to secure a substantial loan to replace an aging recreational centre with new facilities.

The Central Okanagan municipality has proposed a plan to borrow $241.32 million to finance its "Building a Stronger Kelowna" project, which it says would cost $287.5 million. 

The initiative includes:

• Demolishing the 50-year-old Parkinson Recreation Centre and constructing a new building.
• Refurbishing the park surrounding the Parkinson Recreation Centre.
• Establishing new activity centres for all age groups in the Mission and Glenmore neighbourhoods.
• Redeveloping sports fields in the Rutland neighbourhood.

The costs to redevelop the Parkinson Recreation Centre account for approximately 84 per cent of total project expenses. The city has invited Kelowna residents to share their feedback on the project by submitting response forms via mail, email or in-person until Sept. 15.

According to provincial regulations, municipal and regional district governments are required to seek public consent for matters involving long-term borrowing for public works projects, using a process known as the "alternative approval process."

Les Bellamy, a Kelowna resident who also operates a home construction company in Central Okanagan, views the proposed loan as an "astronomical amount of money," and suggests the funds could be better allocated to more pressing needs.

"The rec centre has benefits to our community, but I'm not sure if it's a necessity in comparison to cemeteries and fire halls and those kinds of things," Bellamy told host Chris Walker on CBC's Daybreak South.

Bellamy also questions the timing of the alternative approval process during the summer.

"For the next two months, we're not thinking about municipal spending — we're out with our families at the beach, we're camping, we're entertaining out-of-town guests visiting wineries.

"The last thing we want to do is spend the day talking about politics or municipal spending or filling out an opposition form," he said.

Another resident, Darren Schlamp, said the city should invest a significant amount of money in housing and public transit instead. 

"It is a colossal waste to demolish major structures that are only 50 years old, and landfill the embodied emissions in the building materials instead of refurbishing the facility," Schlamp wrote on Kelowna-based news portal InfoNews.

Growing population necessitates investment: city

Derek Edstrom, the city's divisional director for partnerships and investments, has defended the project, pointing out that Kelowna's population has grown by over 13 per cent between 2016 and 2021 based on the latest census data. 

"It is one of the fastest growing communities in Canada, and as such we do have a dire need to invest appropriately in our recreation and leisure facilities in Kelowna.

"We know the impact it has on our residents and their ability to connect with others to find a place that's safe to get their daily activity," Edstrom said on Daybreak South.

The city says it intends to increase taxes over the next five years to cover the remaining costs, projecting the tax hike to be in the range of 3.91 per cent to 4.83 per cent over five years, equivalent to an average taxpayer paying around $20 annually during that period. 

The city also said there will be no further tax increase after five years to cover the project's expenses and borrowing, and that it plans to use its reserves to support the project.

According to provincial regulations, if more than 12,160 people — 10 per cent of eligible voters in Kelowna — express opposition through the response forms, the city would have to abandon the project or proceed with a referendum.

Edstrom hopes a referendum won't be necessary to move the project forward.

"Going to a referendum on a topic like this is expensive — its cost is equivalent to almost running another election," he said, adding a referendum would also delay the project and may make it more expensive with inflation.