Recreational and Community Services for All
I have taught multiple Lifesaving Society courses, was certified in pool operations, and was certified to teach national lifeguard and recertification courses as a lifeguard/instructor for over ten years (~4000 hours).
Our community and recreational services are integral to a community’s overall mental and physical well-being. Recreational centres are the pillars of our community, creating a united sense of community wellbeing and settlement. Our parks and greenways are the gateways that spotlight the vibrancy and diversity of our community’s image. I am one to always advocate for continued support to open accessibility to go down to a recreation centre to skate, swim, workout, play, etc. As someone who tries to utilize our local pools weekly, these recreational hubs play and have a significant effect on our community.
I agree with the City’s motto and vision to create “A Healthy City for All”, the Parks Master Plan (updated in 2010), our Parks and Greenway Strategic Plan (Started in 2002), and the City’s Mobility Network Project to encourage our community to do more walking, rolling, and cycling. This vision can be elevated to ensure that our recreational and community services always uphold our community’s needs first. A PDF is available on the City of North Vancouver site for more details on the “A Healthy City for All: The Role of Community Recreation.”
What I can’t see is where this strategy pushes council’s focus that recreational services should be treated as a business: a need for these types of services to make value or a profit. Most recreational services, especially recreational facilities, have expenditures that are usually higher than the revenue they generate. I like to think most parks, sports fields and courts, dog parks, or playgrounds aren’t built with the intention to generate revenue for the city.
Even this council and staff’s interpretation of the Community Recreation Strategy reads like an oxymoron when it comes to upholding community needs and recreational service. On one hand, they will tout its motto: “Quality community recreation, comprised of the built and natural environment, programs, and services, inspires residents to be active and connected to their community throughout their life.”
On the flip side, using this strategy, they treat community needs and recreational services like business investments. Services must be evaluated and considered around the balance of the ‘right amount’ or if the amenity meets the demand range. The decision making process is a business-centered focused on profit and costs.
This council can find 5 million to help fund an outdoor pool, with an additional yearly minimum cost of 700,000$ to train, operate, and maintain, because it is estimated to make them money, yet council can’t find the budget to give skateboarders a roof over the skate park being built in the new rec-center.
I can understand the feelings that no one wants to frivolously spend, and everyone wants to be fiscally responsible. But then I question about the inflated cost of Harry Jerome; the total price tag is basically the same price as the original facility approved in 2018. What was the point of delaying it for three years to reduce cost if 1) council didn’t reduce the cost (the total cost is $230 million) and 2) when questioned, the answer is cost estimates don’t always pan out?
When it comes to any plans for future facilities, I believe the goal we are looking towards is the expansion or the continuation of our facilities, whether it be our rec-centres, our parks, or our greenways, the priority and concern should always be how it serves our community’s present needs while envisioning what the future needs may be. While it is important to be concerned about the finances and the cost of such facilities, the point of these facilities, parks and centres is to sustain, create and build upon the bonds of our community.