For months Barrhead town councillors have been wondering what their County of Barrhead counterparts thought was fair contribution towards the recreational facilities and services residents of both municipalities use.
I must admit that I too have been curious at what that number would be.
It turns out that $88,860 is what county council believes is a fair number.
The town on the other hand, not surprisingly, does not.
If I were in their shoes I wouldn’t either and, to tell you the truth, I agree with the town councillors who say the number should be larger.
That being said, no one should be surprised by the amount the county decided to contribute. For more than 20 years the county has contributed a set amount each year, slowly increasing and this year is no exception.
Although I must admit I am somewhat surprised that the county did not decide to increase it a bit more, considering that Municipal Affairs minister Danielle Larivee has given the two municipalities six months to come up with a recreation agreement as a sign of good faith.
But then again, currently there is an agreement in place and why pay more money than you have to?
The question is what percentage of the town’s recreation budget should the county be responsible for? Since I have been in Barrhead, the town’s answer is 50 per cent. It is the main reason the town decided to start the amalgamation process. If town and county residents were all under one roof, everyone would be contributing equally to recreation and the other areas such as fire services, which have also been areas of conflict.
And that is true. If we were to amalgamate, for the most part all residents in all areas of the new municipality would be contributing equally to all services.
However, I don’t think it as simple as some believe — if we were one municipality, all of a sudden there would be money for the pool, Agrena, etc.
Not necessarily. Many town councillors over the last two years have stated their opinion that recreation is an essential service. It is not. Ask any resident or government whose community’s infrastructure that has been greatly impacted by a natural disaster. If a bridge, water treatment plant and a recreation centre are all destroyed, no one will be advocating that the rec centre is the first thing to be replaced. Why? It is not an essential service.
Nor is it a guarantee that if we were all one municipality we would have the same priorities.
All I’m saying is the issue is complicated and both the town and county will have to make sizeable concessions if any agreement over recreation is to be reached. It is probably also in the best interest of both a settlement rather than have one imposed on them. As I keep saying, ‘the Devil You Know.’
