The Greater Vernon Cultural Centre project will be funded, though some local politicians have misgivings about the way that funding will come to pass.
The Regional District of North Okanagan board approved the borrowing of an additional $13 million to address the funding gap for the project, at its meeting Wednesday, Sept. 11.
The approval came despite not all directors being happy with how funding for the project has unfolded, namely the fact that the additional money is being borrowed without the approval of residents, who voted in favour of borrowing $25 million in a 2018 referendum, and then assented to bumping that up to $28 million in a 2022 alternate approval process.
So far, $5 million has been fundraised for the project, which is now expected to cost $46 million. The $13 million shortfall will be covered with short-term borrowing while the previously approved $28 million will be borrowed long-term.
All told, $41 million will be borrowed for the project. The Greater Vernon Advisory Committee was previously presented with the option to borrow the $13 million over the long-term or short-term, and chose the short-term option which did not require approval from the public.
At the meeting, director Kari Gares said while she thinks the Cultural Centre will be "a great asset" for the community, she's concerned that the $13 million is "a big gap" and residents "haven't given us explicit approval" to borrow it.
She said she's also concerned that the funding gap could again widen if fundraising doesn't come to fruition or grants aren't secured.
"My challenge with this is, do we go further down this path in hopes that we will get there or the gap will be narrowed and it won't be that bad on taxation? I don't have confidence right now that we're going to be able to narrow that gap down, so I am struggling with this one," Gares said.
She added she thinks voter assent is needed for the additional borrowing.
"The public, it's their money that we will be spending, and they should have the right in making that decision and not us making the decision for that $13 million gap," Gares said.
Director Brian Quiring, playing "devil's advocate," said he's been championing the project for a long time, but he doesn't like the optics of pushing forward without voter assent.
"My question is, why did we go to a referendum in the first place?" he said.
Like Gares, Quiring expressed concerns about the potential for even further cost escalation.
"My concern is we're likely not going to be able to do it for the additional $13 million. We're likely going to have to come back again and say costs are up," he said.
"I'm in favour of the project, I'm just not in favour of how we got to where we got."
Director Bob Fleming said going back to another public vote would essentially kill the project.
"Even if (a public approval process) was successful, the delay itself makes it fail so that this is no longer a viable project," Fleming said.
To cover the total of $41 million now being borrowed, taxes are expected to increase by $85 per year per household for eight years beginning in 2025, and then $57 per year per household for the following 15 years.
Director Amanda Shatzko said the tax hike could be mitigated because the $13 million is being borrowed short-term, saying the district can make adjustments during budget season to reduce the tax impact.
Despite the concerns, some directors said they have received positive feedback about the fact the project is going ahead, though director Ruth Hoyte said a couple constituents are "going bananas."
The board voted to pass the motion with only Gares opposing.
