Are we really out of line?

Dear sir:
After reading the editorial in the Sept. 1, 2004 issue of the Fort Frances Times, and discussing the curling club’s request with numerous individuals, it appears some of the issues need to be clarified.
The Fort Frances Curling Club Ltd. is a non-profit organization with no shareholders. The club is controlled by its members and the membership is open to anyone. No one owns the company nor can benefit financially by being a member.
The users pay for 100 percent of the operating expenses and they also are paying off the loan that was taken out to build the building.
The town’s infrastructure is enhanced by having this facility available to its citizens and there is absolutely no cost to the town.
If the members choose to stop running the club and wind up the company, the property probably will be given to the Town of Fort Frances. The town then would have to decide whether to incorporate the building into its recreation program or to use it in some other way.
We are really no different than the arena-pool complex except for the ownership and management. The arena-pool complex is owned directly by the town and is run by the town. It does not pay taxes.
In fact, it is subsidized by the town as was discussed in the recent budget debate.
This is not necessarily a bad thing. Generally, businesses and individuals living in a community are willing to accept that part of the taxes they pay go to subsidize infrastructure such as the arena-pool complex, the library, or the museum.
We are not asking to be subsidized. All of our costs already are paid by the users.
Under the existing situation, when curlers pay their dues, roughly $50 per member is now given to the town for its other programs. We already pay taxes at home and at work.
For several years now, the Municipal Act has allowed towns to cancel 100 percent of taxes for non-profit organizations. Our taxes and rebate in the last three years have been as follows:
•Year 2004: Taxes—$28,594; rebate—$0
•Year 2003: Taxes—$26,110; rebate—$4,909;
•Year 2002: Taxes—$27,294; rebate—$4,909.
The difference between the taxes and rebate then represents our members’ contribution to the town’s budget (not sure where the 40 percent mentioned in the editorial figures into this!)
The editorial also compared us to the bowling alley as it is a recreational facility. It also indicated that this facility is a business. In other words, it is owned and operated by an individual or individuals who expect to make a profit.
It is doubtful that the rest of the businesses and individual taxpayers in the community would agree with this type of tax relief.
Would business owners and individual taxpayers think that it is appropriate for curlers to pay more to subsidize the community infrastructure than they do? This is what we have been doing.
To continue this practice is definitely “out of line.”
Sincerely,
Ted Stewart
Fort Frances, Ont.
P.S. We have been asked why we closed the curling club for the summer? We have analyzed our marginal costs to stay open for a few rentals and have found that we lose more money than if we simply close for non-curling months.
If anyone would be interested in renting the facility for the summer and thinks they can cover expenses, please contact us.