Our COW meeting is scheduled to start at 2:15pm, right after a Special Council Meeting (starting at 1:30).
Special Council Meeting highlights
Municipal Stimulus Program (MSP)
In June, the province of Alberta announced a grant program for municipalities to invest in capital projects that support provincial priorities of job creation, enhancing competitiveness and productivity, future economic growth, and “reducing municipal red tape to promote job-creating private sector investment”. Administration is proposing that we submit the following projects to the grant program:
Community Amenities - Lakeview ($5M)
Intersection improvements - Boudreau Road at Bellerose Drive ($1M)
Intersection improvements - Everitt Drive at Ebony Way ($805,000)
Solar PV Program ($1.05M)
Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program Grant Applications
In August, the Government of Canada announced “there would be new options available for the utilization of previously allocated transit grants. Of the total remaining $10,915,868.31 available to the city, we have the ability to transfer all or a portion of the funding from the Transit stream to a newly created COVID-19 Resiliency Stream”. Administration is recommending that we approve the following projects subject to provincial/federal grant approval:
Intersection improvements - Boudreau Road at Bellerose Drive ($1M)
Intersection improvements - Everitt Drive at Ebony Way ($805,000)
Solar PV Program ($1.5M)
COW highlights
Active Communities (ACA) has been actively engaging the city to have us support their privately-owned ice and fitness facility, which ACA would operate as a not-for-profit. Originally, ACA wanted support to build their facility south of City boundaries, but they have since shown that they would be interested in building at any location within the city, most recently at the recreation lands being donated by Rohit west of the Henday. Although ACA’s plan was originally open to including an aquatics facility, I understand that they’ve taken this off the table as it would not be financially viable. On Monday, we will have an opportunity to ask questions about the completed value-for-money assessment that Council requested regarding their plan. The proposed facility being evaluated includes two ice surfaces, four gymnasiums, a fitness centre, and retail space. The full report is available here - I recommend starting at page-29 for anyone short on time.
Note: Council received correspondence suggesting ACA would be open to adding a 12-court Pickleball facility to their plans, but ACA has not communicated any intent to alter their plan - I hope to clear this up during our meeting.
Report highlights
Funding & Ownership:
The plan proposes that St. Albert donates land through a long-term lease in addition to a $20M capital contribution ($24.45M including interest over 20 years) (p. 29-30). Additional contributions of $10M each are required from provincial and federal governments (p. 29). It’s unclear how servicing would be financed.
ACA proposes to own the facility, but this may be problematic in terms of St. Albert securing funding for an asset it doesn’t own (p. 30).
Governance & Operating Structure: The ACA board has exceptional members, with close ties to the community, and appears well-positioned to operated well as a not-for-profit organization.
Financial & Operational:
Although profits are a-typical and “recreation facilities often run deficits, even when private organizations with dedicated/experienced staff run them” (p. 40), ACA is predicting profits starting from the first year of operation. There are some concerns about long-term profitability due to costs of maintaining aging buildings. “Overall, the profitability projected by ACA appears to be somewhat high” (p. 41).
Ice rental rates for the proposed facility would be a blended rate depending on use (adult, youth, or minor sport) and times. Rates are higher than Servus and other St. Albert facilities, but lower than facilities like River Cree (rates on page 73). I’m not sure if accessibility or affordability would be a priority, like it is for City facilities or similar not-for-profit facilities operated by the YMCA. It’s also unclear if reciprocal use for schools would be included in operational plans.
For retail spaces, ACA is predicting 100% occupancy in the first year of operation, which may be optimistic (p. 49).
My comments
At first glance, it seems that ACA would be a wonderful partner to operate an ice facility, but we may have to retain ownership over any facility to protect our investment. I’m also committed to continuing the planning of an aquatics facility, which will be challenging without income from revenue-generating activities (like a fitness gym, retail renters, a daycare, or partners like climbing facilities or physiotherapists). I would love to see this discussion with ACA turn into a partnership model that sees both our ice and aquatics needs balanced with financial considerations.
This is a brief and incomplete overview of our meetings, with my personal comments sprinkled in - In no way are my opinions representative of the official direction of council or the City of St. Albert. Please let me know of any typos or errors.