Acting Director Eckford briefs council on a staff recommendation to apply for a matching grant from the province to update local parks, both low-fee and no-fee, as they’ve not received any attention in many years and are in need of updating.

Updates would include improvements to picnic tables through replacement as well as designating at least one table/park as an accessibility table, with either a paved or stone-based pathway leading to that table, again for accessibility.  Other improvements would involve obtaining new trash receptacles to replace the aging fleet of trash cans currently in place.  And finally, updated signage with the latest town branding to replace the existing signage.

As indicated, the province will match what the town puts up itself and assume 50% of the financial cost of improvements.  In the case of these local parks, Mr. Eckford recommends $150,000 to be the sweet spot for the town, as that would yield a total of $300,000 for the project after the government matches the town investment.

Councillor Dick asked how the money would be spent if the grant application were to be successful.  In other words, who gets a say in how this money is to be spent.

Mr. Eckford indicated that there was every possibility of having council weigh-in on how and where the funds would be directed, but stressed that the money would have to be directed towards the goals stated in the application for the grant.  And so, if accessibility were to be the foundation of the grant, it would also have to be the foundation of how the money is spent.  In other words, you have to remain within the spirit and confines of the grant application.

Councillor Legris noted that such grants also have the potential to have the government assume 70% of the project cost in special circumstances.  Is this something the town staff would consider, or perhaps have already considered?

Mr. Eckford indicated that, based on Renfrew’s population, a case could be made that Renfrew does fall within the defined “special circumstances,” but that to make that application, the content of the proposal would be put under far closer scrutiny, putting it’s approval at risk if the province deemed it not to meet the threshold for the 70% government share.

COMMENTARY

Not much to comment on here, really.  It does appear to be a cost-efficient way to upgrade parts of the parks and recreation mandate at a minimal cost, what with the province throwing in half of the money.  For $150,000, we get $300,000 worth of punch to direct towards improvements at these public parks that have, unfortunately, been neglected for a period of time.   The grant would allow for  improvements that bring those parks up to, or closer to, accessibility standards.

Going after the “special circumstances” grant may be risky, in that the application may be turned down under the closer scrutiny process, and applying for it in the first place may negate the possibility of applying for the 50% grant.  In other words, I’m not sure if you could apply for both simultaneously.  It may well be one or the other, and if that’s the case, it’s probably the more judicious move to apply for the 50% match than the higher one.  Sure you can get lucky, and I’m sure staff would have no problem presenting their case, but still, it just might be that the lesser amount represents the greater chance of approval.  A bird in hand is worth two in the bush, as granny used to say.