The referendum to determine if the City of Victoria can borrow up to $168.9 million to build a $215-million facility to replace Crystal Pool will be held Feb. 8.
And while the results of that vote, which will also indicate which of two sites residents would prefer for the new pool, will determine the city’s next course of action on the aging facility, it’s unlikely to be the last word.
Even if the public votes against financing the project, there’s every chance another option will rise from its ashes.
Mayor Marianne Alto told the sa国际传媒 that residents should not be concerned that a “no” vote means no pool.
“I think what it means is we have to figure out another way. I do think we need a rec centre with a pool; the question is, is this the right one?” Alto said. “If the people on [Feb. 8] say no, then we go back to saying, ‘OK, well if not this one, then what?’
“On the other hand, if people say yes, then we go ahead with this one.”
Alto said she can live with whichever result comes out of the vote.
She said she’s heard the concerns raised by some residents and expects if the vote is a “no” it will be for a combination of reasons ranging from the pricetag and impact on property taxes to bad timing or issues with the design.
If that happens, Alto expects the city to go back to the drawing board and find a project that will work.
The campaign in support of voting yes is hoping it won’t get to that point.
“There is no Plan B for the pool. The city has missed the opportunity to build a new pool at three different times, so this is our chance,” said Isabella Lee of the Let’s Get Crystal Clear campaign. “At this stage we are fully focused on ensuring people get out to vote on Feb. 8, and haven’t considered what will happen after that.”
Lee said they are hearing a lot of support for the project and they intend to work until Feb. 8 to make the case for residents to vote yes.
“We’re hearing support from young families, seniors, swimmers, the accessibility community and residents concerned about climate change and seismic safety. We’ve been talking to young parents in the schools, and it’s nearly unanimous support,” Lee said. “Even those who don’t use the pool understand that the 1971 pool is past its useful life, and every community needs a proper recreation centre.”
She said the strongest argument for it is the existing facility is long past its sell-by date
“The pool is falling apart, constantly broken and won’t last much longer. If a new pool isn’t approved, the capital city of British Columbia may simply not have a recreation centre,” she said. “This has gone on for far too long — it should have been done in 2018, and we’re hearing that people don’t want to wait any longer.”
The “no” campaign, on the other hand, said the plans belong in the recycling bin and the drawing board is exactly where the city should be heading.
Sean Kahil along with a handful of neighbours started the Better Pools Better Future Coalition, which has been planting signs and posters around the city urging a “no” vote and for the city to build a reasonable new pool rather than what they call a “regional mega-project.”
Kahil agreed it’s easy for people to rally around and support a shiny new recreation centre, but he doesn’t think they are considering the trade-offs that come with it.
He said he would like the conversation to evolve from people saying “what do you mean you don’t want a pool, do you hate swimmers?” to something that considers the hard choices that come with a project that will cost as much as $215 million.
“We have to start talking about the issues, like what the trade-offs are,” he said, noting the cost of the pool will translate into significant increases in property taxes and likely the loss or reduction of some programs and services when the city faces the need to balance budgets.
According to the city’s figures, the cost for the pool replacement has nearly tripled since 2017.
The price tag for the Central Park North option, which would be built on the existing site of the pool, is estimated at $209.2 million, and would take five to six years to build.
Borrowing for that option would be reduced to $162.9 million by using $30 million from the city’s debt reduction reserve and $17 million from its parking reserve fund.
The price tag for the Central Park South option, to be built on the playground and sport courts beside the existing pool is $215.9 million, but borrowing would be reduced to $168.9 million by using the reserve funds. That option would be built over five-and-a-half years.
Derrick Newman, the City of Victoria’s director of parks, recreation and facilities, said the cost increases since 2017 — when a new facility was estimated at $70 million — are down to the increased cost for building materials, labour and other expenses that are required for a pool.
The city estimates $76.5 million was added in costs for building. The other major cost increases were $33 million in soft costs like architectural and engineering fees and permits, $15.5 million for underground parking and $14 million as a result of building code and energy regulation changes.
To pay it off, the average residential taxpayer will see a $64 annual increase on their property tax bill for the first three years during construction, followed by increases of $48 and $16 in years four and five.
Once the new building is open, the average residential taxpayer would pay an additional $256 per year for 20 years, while the typical business would pay $660 per year to finance the new facility.
Kahil expressed concern about Central Park being turned into a construction site for five years and the loss of trees – 14 could be removed if residents choose the Central Park North option and 29 if they opt for Central Park South
The project is too much for Victoria and needs to be scaled back to something less expensive, he said.
Kahil said the “no” campaign has faced an uphill battle as it is fighting against both a “yes” campaign and what he considers the biased ads from the city itself.
He said the city’s awareness campaign has been highlighting the virtues of a bigger, better and more accessible facility but not talking about the programs that will be cut to pay for it.
That same criticism has been leveled by Coun. Stephen Hammond, who released a notice of motion Friday that hopes to have the city pull its “one-sided advertising regarding the referendum” and replace upcoming advertising and information sessions with reasoning for both the “yes” and “no” sides.
That motion will be debated at committee of the whole on Thursday, Jan. 23.
Hammond argues the information coming from the city gives the appearance of promoting the project and giving more weight to the “yes” side of the binding financial question. He said there is no mention of the cost to residents and businesses to pay for the pool.
To be fair to the city, the costs of the project and impact on taxpayers has never been hidden and have been included in staff reports and presentations, media reports and will again be included in a city newsletter that residents will receive in the coming week.
For her part, the mayor said she has tried to remain circumspect, not wanting to offer any comments that would be influential one way or the other.
“Obviously I support the fact that we need a new recreation centre with a pool, that’s why I voted in favour, but it’s my view the city should be presenting information about the facts and what people need to know in order to make an informed decision,” she said.
The cost to taxpayers of a new facility could be reduced if the city can access funding from senior governments.
Thomas Soulliere, Victoria’s deputy city manager, said there are some major infrastructure programs available through the federal government and administered by the province.
“For the city it’s all about timing and alignment and making sure that we’ve got clarity on when those application periods are and when decisions are going to be made,” he said, noting they have already applied for a $25 million grant for this project. “And if there’s an opportunity to apply for more, we’ll be exploring that for sure.”
The mayor has suggested there could be sponsorship opportunities or naming rights sold to help offset the cost to taxpayers.
Alto said the project and the referendum have certainly stirred up the community due to the scope of the project, and the complicated issues involved.
“There’s all sorts of neighbourhood issues, citywide issues, and there’s all sorts of issues around the pros and cons of whether or not this should be a regional facility,” she said. “It’s a complicated matter. It’s a big-ticket item with a fairly hefty price tag, so I’m not really surprised when people are very passionate.”
What residents will be voting on:
Residents will vote on whether to borrow as much as $168 million to rebuild the Crystal Pool, as well as on which of two sites in Central Park they would prefer to see the new facility built — on the site of the existing pool (Central Park North) or on the playground and sport courts beside the existing pool (Central Park South).
The decision on the financing is binding, while the vote on the site is not.
The most expensive city project ever:
The budget for the pool replacement has nearly tripled since 2017.
The Central Park North option, with an estimated price tag of $209.2 million, would take five to six years to build.
Borrowing for that option would be reduced to $162.9 million by using $30 million from the city’s debt reduction reserve and $17 million from its parking reserve fund.
The price tag for the Central Park South option is $215.9 million, but borrowing would be reduced to $168.9 million by using the reserve funds. That option would take an estimated five and a half years.
What it will cost taxpayers:
The average residential taxpayer will see a $64 annual increase to the property tax bill for the first three years during construction, followed by increases of $48 and $16 in years four and five.
Once the new building is open, the average residential taxpayer would pay an additional $256 per year for 20 years, while the typical business would pay $660 per year to finance the new facility.
What the facility will have:
A new Crystal Pool promises to include a 50-metre pool with movable bulkhead, a leisure pool with a lazy river and play features, two hot pools plus a steam room and a sauna.
It will have a large fitness area, a half-size gymnasium and multi-purpose rooms for dance, wellness and art activities, a seniors’ room, space for child minding, family change rooms, and a community gathering space.
Why replace it:
The city says many of the existing facility’s systems and components are at or near end-of-life and require significant investment to maintain operations. The pool drainage system, waterproofing and parts of the building structure are at risk of failure
There are accessibility barriers at the building, which is responsible for more than 40 per cent of the city’s greenhouse gas emissions.
Could the existing facility be renovated:
The short answer is yes, with enough money.
Thomas Soulliere, Victoria’s deputy city manager, said council decided in 2017 that a new facility made more sense than spending millions on a 1970s facility that needed too much work and too much money to get it to the standards required today for accessibility, energy efficiency, customer service and overall utilization.
Renovation options in 2017 ranged from about $40 million to renovate it on the existing site, to $56 million for renovation and a small expansion.
He said time is of the essence for the facility as “things are failing on a fairly regular basis.”
What happens if the vote is “no”
City staff would come back to council to get clarity on directions and what it would like to do with the existing facility.
What happens if the vote is “yes”
City staff would start the procurement process to assemble a project team and move into the detailed design phase.
Where and how to vote:
Crystal Garden, Central Middle School, George Jay Elementary School, Glenlyon Norfolk School, James Bay Community School, Margaret Jenkins Elementary School, Oaklands Elementary School, Quadra Elementary School, Sir James Douglas Elementary School and Victoria West Elementary School.
Registered voters must bring one piece of identification with them, while those registering to vote must bring two pieces of ID.
To be eligible to vote you must be a resident of Victoria, at least 18, a Canadian citizen and have lived in the province for at least six months.
Advance voting will be offered from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Jan. 29, Feb. 3 and Feb. 5 at the Crystal Garden at 713 Douglas St.
Starting Jan. 6, residents were able to vote by mail by completing an online ballot request at , calling 250-361-0571 or going to City Hall before Jan. 31.
More information:
Information about the Crystal Pool Replacement Project is available at .
>>> To comment on this article, write a letter to the editor: [email protected]
