Fitness centre future uncertain, as property goes up for sale

By Sharon Harrison
The future of the Prince Edward Fitness and Aquatic Centre (PEFAC) appears an uncertain one as news comes that the owner has put the property up for sale.

“Late in August, we were informed that the property was going on the market and has been listed for sale. Obviously, there are a number of potential scenarios at this time and things continue to evolve,” shared Sue Mathieu with PEFAC’s board of directors.

“This news hit us very suddenly and we are going day-by-day in terms of making things happen,” she said in her deputation to council’s recent committee of the whole meeting, in which she included details of PEFAC’s annual report.

It was also revealed PEFAC has been given six months notice of a significant rent increase by the property owner, something they are currently negotiating. Mathieu confirmed they do not know what the increase will be at this time.

When asked by councillor Corey Engelsdorfer if there was a reason given on why an increase was coming now (given there have been no increases for years), Mathieu said she didn’t have that answer.

“We don’t know why now has become the time, I suspect it may be tied up with putting the property on the market, but we really don’t know.”

While PEFAC has indicated they would like to buy the building and continue operating the facility, they acknowledge they face many challenges, including fundraising and other options to be navigated. They are actively working on solutions and consulting community partners as they look to put a fundraising plan together.

“Our plan is to secure the property for long-term use as an aquatic and fitness centre. To do so, we need to raise funds.”

The property is currently listed for $4.6 million.

“In the meantime, it is business as usual at PEFAC with a full slate of programs. Our annual membership drive is underway, and we are very optimistic about the future.”

In presenting the annual report, Mathieu outlined key performance indicators in her deputation to council sharing how membership numbers continue to increase year-over-year, with peak membership numbers up nine per cent over the last year (with 1,297 members), and day pass sales are up 40 per cent (about 3,000 people). Facility usage was also up three per cent (with 94,000 space visits) and the day camp served close to 100 children.

As part of the fulfillment of conditions under the exceptional funding partnership with the municipality, the facility is available to any non-member, and anyone can attend for the day for a public swim, or to participate in programs (day camp, swimming lessons, etc.).

She presented councillors a two-fold request.

The first was for PEFAC to be declared a project of community interest by the municipality. By doing so, the organization, as part of any potential fundraising campaign, would be able to issue official tax receipts to donors, something they are not permitted to do now since they are not a registered charity. While they will be able to fundraise without it, they will not be able to issue tax receipts, so she said it was important to get the declaration so they can move forward.

The second ask was for help from municipal staff to explore ways in which the municipality could support PEFAC efforts to ensure the continuity of its operations at the current location.

After some lengthy discussion, council eventually voted to refer the request back to staff to seek additional information about the campaign and the recommended terms of the agreement.

The recorded vote passed 9-2, with councillors Chris Braney and Roy Pennell opposed (councillors Bill Roberts, Sam Grosso and John Hirsch were absent).

There were a number of questions and concerns posed by council members which included things like who is using the facility and where are they coming from, who benefits from it and who doesn’t. Pennell questioned the value of the facility to all County residents, not just those within the immediate area.

Much of the discussion came back to money and budget, and whether the municipality should be funding the facility at all, especially given the huge demands on municipal funds (tax dollars) and an expected tough budget year ahead.

While councillor Chris Braney said he saw value in the project, he asked, where does it stop, and what’s the responsibility on the municipality?

“We have contributed to put money in with the knowledge that would cease when you would be self-sufficient and independent,” stated Braney, who said he was reluctant to commit to any further funding.

“This year is going to be very tough budget-wise with decisions we have to make around the table.”

On facing a significant rent increase and asking the municipality to help cover it, Engelsdorfer said, “I am reluctant… it’s tough when you are lining somebody else’s pockets with municipal money”.

Mayor Steve Ferguson asked if anyone has come forward wanting to provide a financial support, where he also asked if PEFAC had any idea of the appetite from members of the public to make donations.

“Nobody has come forward yet, it’s only been three weeks since the news has been public, and we have not approached our members with an ask for support until we clear up the issue around charitable donations, and then we are trying to put a fundraising plan together,” explained Mathieu.

Councillor Janice Maynard noted how the YMCA seem to be in a lot of the towns and villages, and given their reach, she asked if PEFAC have had any discussions at all with the YMCA on a satellite facility.

Mathieu confirmed they have not approached the YMCA at this point. “They are running a big campaign in Belleville at the moment, and I believe most of their model is to source funds from different levels of government and then build a facility.”

PEFAC has rented the Picton facility from the Lester family, who own the building and the land, for some 20 years at a significantly reduced rent which has enabled the not-for-profit organization to successfully operate the facility in an affordable way, and grow its membership.

Operated by a volunteer board of directors, the not-for-profit organization has been in operation at the 13263 Loyalist Parkway, Picton site since September 2005.

“The Lester family has been exceptionally generous to our community, first in building and operating the RecPlex, and then in leasing it to PEFAC, a not-for-profit corporation, for the last 20 years for a rate well below market prices, and with no increases,” reminded Mathieu, who confirmed things have changed with the Lester family’s situation with the sale related to the settling of estate matters.

She called PEFAC a financial success story, with earned revenue accounting for 92 per cent of operating costs, with the County’s $70,000 annual contribution representing about eight per cent.

Mathieu stated how there are very few not-for-profit aquatic and fitness facilities, with most of these types of facilities being operated by municipal governments at significant cost to tax payers. She said that PEFAC is not only a place of physical activity, but one for overall wellness and is a place for socializing and community connections.

Speaking to the facility’s future, she reminded that she presented a long-term vision last spring which included having an aquatics and fitness facility in Prince Edward County, operated and owned by a not-for-profit corporation, with support from users, community organizations and the municipality.

“As part of this vision, we retained some professional expertise to help us look at what could be done to the existing facility, such as the addition of new elements and some major upgrades – this was preparatory to us thinking about buying the site.”

She indicated how initial findings indicated that there was sufficient space on the site to add new facility elements, such as a gymnasium, either incorporating the existing building or in a long-term phased re-build.

“This whole process has been put on hold, given the recent events,” she said.

Ferguson spoke to how there is enough land to expand the facility into a gym facility and other things that are much needed in Prince Edward County.

“It would be ideal under the right circumstances because this is the only public pool in the County, and we don’t have a public gym at this point,” said Ferguson.

Maynard asked how many small rural towns, like Picton, in east central Ontario have public pools.

“Are there any in small towns this size?” asked Maynard. “If we are to continue to have a pool… first, we have to decide whether it’s even viable in small town Ontario to have an aquatic centre.”

Pennell spoke to those businesses already offering fitness, where he questioned whether the municipality should be working against a business that is doing the same thing for profit, while acknowledging that no other such business has a pool.

“I’m starting to get the feeling that we considered a council of cash cow for this County, and if there is any way we can work with your group or any others to help get money coming in, that’s what I want to see,” he said. “Because we can’t go on, it doesn’t matter which group it is, keep asking for money. We’ve got to figure out ways to raise money and there’s lots of people out there with the ability to do it.”

Regarding competing with other facilities, Mathieu said there are a number of small gyms in the County, but they are very small, and they are quite expensive compared to PEFAC.

“We have the capacity to put in 100 people at a time into our fitness facilities,” she said.

“The other thing that is very important is that the fitness part of it helps support the pool. And the pool enables us to do swimming lessons for young people, run swim-to-survive programs, help people with joint issues to get exercise, so the two work together and the one supports the other.”

Councillor David Harrison asked what happens to any funds raised in the event the facility is sold to someone else. “Where do the funds go, do they come to us or whoever?”

Several councillors sought clarification about what exactly a project of community interest is, with Maynard suggesting council doesn’t really know what it is, where she asked for more detail.

“There is a big difference for a project of community interest for on-going to continue operations in a building that could be sold, and having it go to the possible purchase of a new building,” expressed Maynard.

Councillor Brad Nieman also wanted more clarification on what classifies something a project of community interest, where he asked what the donations would be used for.

While any fundraised money may go to purchase the building, cover the rent increase or other operational costs, etc., interim CAO Adam Goheen said they need to know what the campaign looks like. He said it needs to be determined how the cash is spent and where it will be disbursed.

“It’s critical to this process that we know what the money will be collected and used for,” said Goheen. “We wouldn’t move forward until we knew what exactly that money will be used for.”

Braney repeated his concern about where does it stop, where does it end, and said he can think of many other worthwhile community interest projects throughout the County.

“I find that we are getting into a slippery slope. I just don’t want to take on any other projects at this point because there are many other community interest projects that are… I don’t think we should be endeavouring to take on a project like this,” he said.

“I believe if it is going to be continually funded, it should be publicly or privately, with private interest.”

Braney continued, saying it comes down to practicality, noting concern for staff time and budget, but also expertise in administering the program, expertise he said he wasn’t sure the County had.

“If we accept this, we are going to get flooded with…. ‘we want the County to have ours as a community interest’…. I can just see the wave of people hitting us at the door,” he challenged. “And once you set a precedent, how do you say no to anybody else? It opens up a whole floodgate of people who say, well, if you are doing it for them, you’ve got to do it for me.”

Mathieu confirmed she would be returning at budget time with a more specific request in terms of operating support for 2026.

“We as council have got to look very seriously because of the financial shape of this County as we move ahead,” added Pennell. “It is very imperative if you are looking for funding from the County, we should be getting accurate numbers, and who in fact is using it, its affordability and who benefits and who doesn’t.”