As municipal politicians talk to their counterparts at the federal and provincial levels, the topic of supporting and improving the infrastructure often arises, likely leaving many voters wondering what all the fuss is about.

City taxpayers are finding out in short order what the fuss is about; first, the city recently received an MRIF infrastructure grant in the amount of $250,000.

This was rightly described by Coun. Dick Michel at the recent city council meeting as "a double-edged sword", as these are matching funds. In this case, the grant is to go towards the replacement of the city's Centennial outdoor pool, a project that will run at about $750,000.

In other words, while the grant was very nice to get, the city now has to come up with the balance, a half million dollars, in order to access those grant funds.

It's not a question of need, really; the pool, built as a project for Canada's Centennial just over 40 years ago, is showing its age, and won't last much longer without some serious intervention on the part of the city. Even though it's true the pool can only be used for a part of the year, it's a well-used and much-needed recreational facility for those hot summer days.

The other thing to consider is that recreation is one of those areas the city expects to subsidize with tax dollars to a large extent in order to have the facilities used by its residents. Thus, user fees only pay a percentage of the actual operating costs of the facility, less than half in fact.

This is a different matter altogether from the capital cost of replacing the pool, for which the city has suggested spreading the cost over two budget seasons to make it more possible to pay for.

There are a variety of options available to the city to consider, but taxpayers may not want to see them being used. For example, the city could self-finance internally, or as a last resort, take out a debenture loan to be repaid over a number of years. Council isn't likely to look at this as the city is currently debt-free, and taxpayers would like the city to stay that way - if it's possible.

An option that could be considered is going the same way as the Colosseum, which is another well-used recreation and sports facility. The city has embarked on a two-pronged fundraising effort, including selling naming rights. Why not do that with the Leisure Centre, since there are now internal problems arising with the heating system for that building?

If the city is able to afford it by spreading the cost over two years, then more power to them - but sponsorship is one possible way to mitigate those costs, and be able to make the necessary improvements to the pool for the benefit of all citizens without excessive costs. - Greg Nikkel