Regional Recreation (TRP)

Great response so far. Please keep the momentum up and forward this survey to anyone else you know who might be interested in getting this resolved.

Many Thanks

https://forms.gle/yMUmeZck61SXNG6s7

Thank you to all 70 people who have filled in this survey. Keep them coming please

https://forms.gle/yMUmeZck61SXNG6s7

We're at 125 responses to the survey so far and the results are not surprising with nearly 50% of respondants suggesting the TRP should be abandoned entirely. As happy as I am to see the response it saddens me to hear of the negative impact it has had on many of our lives.

155 responses shows me that this is definitely something that needs resolving. Please encourage others to fill in this survey. This is likely just the beginning of the process to get this issue put to bed. Thank you so much everybody.

https://forms.gle/yMUmeZck61SXNG6s7

191 individuals have so far mostly expressed discontent about this issue with almost 90% saying that both the TRP has affected their decision to recreate in Trail and that Rosslanders should not pay more to use their facilities. There have been some interesting comments and sadly some incorrect assumptions that I have not done research. Many people seem to have given up hope around this issue. I'm going to leave this survey open for a while longer and will likely need some help going forward. Please feel free to reach out to me@andylewis.net and if you have not already done so please fill in the survey https://forms.gle/yMUmeZck61SXNG6s7

Does anyone remember, or is there a reference to the annual amount that the City of Trail required in order for Rossland residents to use Trail facilities without a day use fee surcharge? That number would be an important piece of of this debate. Since it's Trails policy, it's likely that Rossland residents will be unsuccessful at changing it. One way or another we have to pay for it. 

https://www.trailtimes.ca/news/rossland-trail-fail-to-reach-rec-agreemen...   

This discussion needs context. At one time everyone in Rossland paid the same user fees as residents in Warfield, Trail, Montrose, Fruitvale, etc. Then Rossland Mayor and Council decided they didn't want to contribute toward the operating cost (or something). Rossland pulled out and now we have TRP. What else could Trail do? Kathy Moore was a councilor when the breakdown occurred. This problem appears political. Curious what the City of Rossland did with the funds that once contributed to financing shared recreational facilities and provided equal access to Rosslanders. The survey should include the question 'Do you think Trail, Warfield, Beaver Valley taxpayers should subsidize Rossland residents' recreation?' The problem is the direct result of Rossland Mayor and Council failing to come to an agreement for 10+ years. There must be some seriously entrenched positions to let this ridiculous situation continue for so long. You would think all manner of mediation and negotiation would be used in order not to see Rossland citizens, especially the kids, suffer under the current system. Perhaps the situation will change under a new municipal government. Don't blame our community neighbours. Just sayin' ...

OrthM in 2015 when it was last brought to the table Rossland said they could afford $50k. Trail offered $100k (down from their original offer that was much higher).

beebe thanks for the article link. It didn't mention the amounts and I wasn't actually aware of the discrepancy until the report produced by Aaron Cosbey last year that highlighted this could have been resolved for an additional $50k, which although not pocket change doesn't seem like the sort of amount that should have prevented us from moving forward especially when you consider the amount earmarked for the recreation bursary and other projects of far less significance.

dj2074 you are incorrect that Kathy Moore was Mayor at the time that the relationship broke down. I chose the questions quite carefully when writing this survey but thanks for your suggestion.

junglemassive, you are mistaken. My post reads "Kathy Moore was a councilor when the breakdown occurred." 

Here's what I remember, though I'm sure others can jump in and correct me. Things broke down around 2009 when Greg Granstrom was mayor of Rossland and Dieter Bogs was mayor of Trail, because Rossland was frustrated with paying a good portion of the costs of Trail's facilities (pool, arena, fieldhouse, ball diamonds, etc), but they had no say whatsoever in the management and budget of those facilities. Also, Rossland had to contribute to the funding of all those Trail facilities, while they were also paying for all of their own facilities - the arena, pool, parks, etc. It just got to be too much to afford. They tried to negotiate, but got nowhere, and probably won't, as far as I understand, as long as Trail's CEO is the CEO, as he's pretty set against any kind of compromises. Now that's just heresay, so take it for what it is. I know that the councils have the final say. I personally think it's fair that we pay more for the use of those Trail facilities if we're not paying taxes towards them, but what infuriates me is that Rossland is the only community that has to. I just don't see how that can be legal, and it's clearly done purely out of spite. I've gone to pools in other communities, where if you are from outside the taxation area, you pay a higher price. That's how it should be - people from Castlegar, for example, should be paying the same as Rosslanders. Singling out Rossland just makes for even more divisiveness.

dj2074 my apologies. I misread your comment.

Shelley thanks for your comment. I understand that what Trail are doing is actually legal although it is morally questionable, at best. Interested to know in your experience where else charges more for non-community members? I'm doing my best to understand the history before I take this any further so your comment and perspective is helpful. Thank you.

If anyone else has any suggestions, information or difficult questions that need asking please send them my way. me@andylewis.net 

I think Friutvale, Montrose, Trail, Warfield and Rossland should all amalgamate and share resources. Five councils for 15000 people seems a bit ridiculous.

I think this is mainly about the Trail Aquatic Center although the TRP fees apply to other City of Trail run facilities.

This all started in the late 80's/early 90's. At that time there was a regional recreation agreement and Rossland was part of it. There is a recap of the history in this article. The City of Trail desired to replace the Wright pool and wanted an indoor facility similar, but bigger of course, to what Nelson had built. The Regional District held a referendum and the facility was voted down. Trail decided to go ahead and build anyway without funding from the Regional District. After the facility became operational the City of Trail began including the facility's operating costs in their recreation costs which were shared through the Regional District which essentially circumvented the results of the referendum. The net operating cost for the facility was quite high (at the time over $250,000 per year) and formed a significant portion of the RD rec budget. It turned out that Rossland was paying significantly more into the RD for recreation than they were getting back in support of Rossland facilities. In 2008 the Regional Recreation agreement dissolved when Rossland and others decided they would be better off on their own. Since then various areas have negotiated with Trail to obtain Trail resident rates (Trail Residents Program or TRP) at Trail facilities.  As an example Montrose concluded a 5 year agreement in the fall of 2016 to participated in TRP at a cost of $125,000 annually. Trail and Rossland have made a few attempts to negotiate agreements however they are not in the same ballpark on pricing.

Trail will never, willingly, accept any amalgamation that allows Teck taxation to flow outside of their control. In 2014 Trail struck an agreement with Teck to support expanding the city boundary south into Electoral District A. Teck would get reduced taxation on its lands and the City of Trail would get taxes that would otherwise have flowed to the Regional District and hence to Rossland, Fruitvale, etc.

I guess your viewpoint on this depends on where you live. Trail built the Aquatic Facility and now pays to operate it. They have held the attitude that if anyone else wants to use it they will do it on Trail's terms. If the situation were reversed would Rossland behave any differently? Rossland Council(s) have looked at this matter several times and always decided that the money is better spent supporting existing Rossland facilities than paying Trail to use theirs. The City of Trail has stated a number of times that they feel facility use is a one way street. Trail residents are generally not interested in using Rossland facilities however Rossland residents want to use Trail facilities.

If I am remembering correctly, around 5 years ago the city of Rossland was reimbursing Rossland residents who purchased a Trail pool membership, I think it was 50% of the costs. Don't know if they are still offering this but it would probably be cheaper than paying $125,000+ annually.

Thank you rossville for linking those old articles. Especially interesting to see the RRR Facebook page. Reasonably disheartening to see all the effort back then go nowhere but maybe there is another way.

As of now the City of Rossland can barely maintain the facilites that we have already, including the arena and outdoor swimming pool, which apparenytly is only used by 13% of the population of Rossland.  That number could be inaccuarte, but it's a significantly small slice of the total people in this town, yet we all pay into the tax base which keeps it going, and it's a bit of a money pit.  Now while I don't exactly agree with how the Trail Aquatic Center charges people from Rossland, the city did opt out of contributing to funds to maintain the facility (which other people here have done a great job of researching) it's still somewhat valid.  If the solutiuon is for the City to engage in annual funding to the Aquatic Center so individual fees go down, my question is why should I pay for it?  Why should my taxes go up, and my monetary contribution to the town I live in go towards lowering user fees for the maybe 20-30 people from Rossland that use the Trail pool? I don't think I need to point out that this would be an incredibly poor use of our limited city resoruces.

Thanks for your comment Dylan. Your numbers are way off and it's not just about the pool. It is about regional recreation as a whole. I have been in contact with many groups who are affected by this and it is a lot more than 20-30 individuals who are affected. I am not saying that Rossland should pay Trail anything. I feel personally that the solution would be for Trail to abandon the TRP entirely as it is a cost in itself and is a very negative, exclusive, unfair program that is affecting many user groups. Recreation, much like education and healthcare is a costly item on any Government balance sheet however it is arguably a necessity and enriches the lives of its citizens. I don't have all the answers and there are clearly people who have done more work in this area than I have. I just want to help it on its way for the betterment of everybody. The problem we all face is that this petty dispute goes on, unresolved and proactive resolution is not something I see happening. The survey I put out just a few days ago has had 250 responses and Kari's survey from 2010 had about 300 as well. These are clear indications that this is something people want resolved. All the best, Andy

For discussion...at what popoulation threshold, do the preferences of Rossland residents ethically require the address of Council?  The 2016 census population for Rossland was 3,729.. I would speculate that were at say 4,000 currently.  If there's been 250 responses to the recent pole, and say (again, speculating) that 70% of respondants are in favor or some type of taxpayer aid in resolving the TRP issue...that would be 175 out of 4,000 (4.4%)...Ackwnoledging that not all 4,000 residents are aware of the survey and/or have had an opportunity to participate..but nonetheless...   Am I out to lunch, in my expectation that Council's consideration should be for what's best for the majority of City's residents?...meaning that until 2,000 residents are on board (assumption included), there really isn't anything to address.  This same issue was discussed during the Mid Town Development petition debate previously (not to sidetrack the discussion). 

That is a good question OrthoM and something I decided not to consider at this point as this was just a stab in the dark to find out how much interest there is in resolving this. My survey was intentionally short and informal so it was easy to respond to. I think given the response it would be worthwhile attempting to look for an interim solution to the problem that I will likely present to Council. I feel there are bigger issues this brings up that will likely be election issues next year. During the period between now and then would be a good time to look into putting forth a more formal survey to garner input from as many residents as possible.

Thanks to Rossville for that excellent overview of the history. I'd forgotten a few of those details.

"What you're asking is for my taxes to increase so that your son can enjoy subsidized swimming."

Actually no I'm not. That's what you're projecting. I'm aiming for this pretty decade plus old political dispute to get resolved and in the interim I'm likely to propose that the amount our city already budgeted for gets reapportioned to subsidize this unfair penalty Rosslanders as a whole are charged to recreate in Trail.

I don't know the answers to the financial issues/conflict, but something to consider is that the pool is not just for kids and athletes.  It is also an important part of rehab for some who, for whatever reason, cannot walk or cycle outdoors or need a non-weight bearing form of aerobic whole body exercise.  Or the social component for seniors Aquafit, etc.  Or for anyone struggling with arthritis or other conditions, eg MS, recovery from injury/surgery, etc.   I personally don't like chlorinated swimming pools, but I know of many who benefit from the year round exercise, and am grateful the region has such facilities. 

256 responses to my little survey. Seems there has been quite a bit of interest in getting a fix. Thank you to everyone who has participated.

Overwhelmingly respondents (of whom 95% are from Rossland) think Rosslanders shouldn't pay more to access Trail's services and a majority (54%) think Trail should abandon the TRP entirely.

I think the reality is that, although petty, the dispute will likely not end any time soon...and in regards to the idea of reapportioning the existing budget for Rossland Recreation, that would require a reduction in  frequency and/or availability of our current recreational programs..which would likely be met with objection from community members. It costs a lot for us to have recreational facilities in our community and if we don't safe guard that priviledge, a day may come when we lose it. Personally, I'm in favor of keeping as much of our taxation revenue in our comunity as possible and  

"reapportioning the existing budget for Rossland Recreation" again that is not what I am saying. There was $50k / year on the table that Rossland offered to Trail to "resolve/pay for" the TRP.

The $50k/year was probably not new money as it would have come out of the existing Rossland recreation budget. If it was given to Trail there would have been $50k /year less spent on Rossland recreation facilites and programs each year.

Speaking of local facilities, had the city committed to $100k, or even $50k/year, would it be in the position to save Rossland Arena last year?

I wonder if Trail knows how much money it collects per year thanks to non-resident fees. They might as well have zero incentive to negotiate if the amount is significant.

Also notice this sad announcement from the city (https://rossland.civicweb.net/document/12041): 

With regret, Council approved staff’s recommendation for limited operations for our pool this summer. Despite offering competitive salaries, staff was unable to find enough employees to allow us to operate the facility on our usual schedule. This is becoming an issue for many small, community pools around the province.

Jacek that's a question u want to ask Trail Council. I've contacted their director of recreation but if I don't get an answer that way I'll be going the FoI route.

Typo sorry: "that's a question I want to ask Trail Council"

Here are the results of the survey. Thank you to all for filling this in. Quite clearly there is a large proportion of residents who want the TRP issue resolved. While I consider next steps I invite anyone to contact me regarding the TRP me@andylewis.net

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScXsbXMuw3GGovzcpmGBCTVcgqhAdbn...

"Trail and Rossland Sign Recreation Agreement for 2024"

Beuarocracy is a slow moving beast.

Nice to see some sort of update to this situation.

Hopefully eventually they will scrap the TRP entirely.