In a matter of weeks, Victoria residents will decide on a plan to replace the Crystal Pool for as much as $216 million plus inevitable cost overruns.

The features and design were conceptualized years ago in a much different era B´ÎÔª¹ÙÍøÍøÖ·“ lending rates were much lower and the economy was better B´ÎÔª¹ÙÍøÍøÖ·“ using public feedback from 2016-18.

The facility will include a 50-metre pool with movable bulkhead, a leisure pool with a lazy river, and play features, two hot pools plus a steam room and a sauna.

It will also have a large fitness area, a half-size gymnasium and multi-purpose rooms for dance, wellness and art activities, a seniors room, space for child minding, universal change rooms, and a community gathering space.

Building an Olympic-sized pool and increasing the square footage of the facility by 52% are major contributors to the jaw-dropping cost.

Why are residents asked to choose the location when the Central Park North site is considered the most economical by $9.6 million and efficient option, with a shorter construction timeline and reduced complexity and risk?

So, Victorians vote on Feb. 8 on whether the city may borrow up to $168.9 million. To pay the rest of the bill, $47 million will be taken from reserves (monies that will need to be replenished by taxpayers).

ItB´ÎÔª¹ÙÍøÍøÖ·™s reported that Burnaby terminated the contract with HCMA Architecture and Design on its recreation centre when it came in B´ÎÔª¹ÙÍøÍøÖ·˜significantly over budget.B´ÎÔª¹ÙÍøÍøÖ·™ After a cost analysis, in July 2024 council approved reducing the building size substantially. HCMA is also VictoriaB´ÎÔª¹ÙÍøÍøÖ·™s project lead.

Once completed, the North Central Park option would impact property taxes by an average hike of $232 per residence or 7.24% for 20 years. As for the South option, property taxes would need to be hiked by an average of $240 per residence or 7.54% for 20 years. If you are a business owner, itB´ÎÔª¹ÙÍøÍøÖ·™s more.

As the financing is currently structured, these increases are on top of normal year-to-year tax and utility hikes by city council. ThatB´ÎÔª¹ÙÍøÍøÖ·™s a non-starter considering current affordability issues.

LetB´ÎÔª¹ÙÍøÍøÖ·™s face it: A substantial provincial or federal grant, or both, are needed. A regional grant is also critical given the closure of other pools, since it will be increasingly used by other South Island residents. Weary Victoria taxpayers must demand a two-tier user-fee structure since they are paying for the pool and financing. Instead of 20 years, maybe amortize the loan over 25 or 30 years.

The only other option is to scrap this plan, go back to the drawing board and design something more sensible and affordable.

How else do residents cope with the huge financial implications if the city proceeds with this very expensive mega project? The alternative is another unfortunate city shemozzle.

Stan Bartlett, vice-chair

Grumpy Taxpayer$ of Greater Victoria