VOTE
THE VISIONThe VisionThe short versionThe galleryThe reports
THE PLANPrioritiesThe first 90 daysHow we pay for itThe hospitalThe new rec centreQuick Action FundWhat a mayor can doThe big projectsLook things upCommunication
WHY JONWhy JonMeet Jon
GET INVOLVEDGet involvedYour voiceDonate
MULTI-USE RECREATION FACILITY

GET TO SHOVELS
FASTER.

Collingwood has spent years studying recreation needs. The need is no longer the question.

What we already know

The Town and The Blue Mountains completed a Joint Multi-Use Recreation Feasibility Assessment that found strong demand for additional recreation capacity across multiple categories. More than 3,300 people responded to the general survey, and approximately 90% said recreation facilities were very or extremely important to them. The study ranked aquatics first, ice second and courts third, followed by library and community space.

Joint Multi-Use Recreation Feasibility Assessment, via Town of Collingwood council materials

Council has also now authorized the purchase of 725 Tenth Line for a future Multi-Use Recreation Facility and other potential community uses. The property is about 37 acres, and about 34 of those can be built on. The Town says that is enough for a building of up to roughly 245,000 square feet, plus parking and services, with room to add more later. The land transaction is expected to be completed by the end of 2026.

Town of Collingwood, Engage Collingwood

Our arenas, pools and gyms are effectively at capacity. When nearly every hour is booked by leagues or paid programs, the free skates, family skates, open gyms and public swims go with them. Families with less money are the first to lose their spot. New capacity should create room for everyone, not just more booked hours.

We have moved beyond asking whether Collingwood needs more recreation capacity. The question now is: how do we get it built?

MY APPROACH

SYNCHRONIZED
PARALLEL DELIVERY.

Major municipal projects are too often managed sequentially. One study finishes before another starts. Design waits for servicing. Funding waits for design. Partnerships wait for a finished concept. Procurement starts late. Every handoff creates more waiting. That can add years.

Sequential delivery

Program → site work → design → funding → partnerships → operating model → procurement → construction

Each stage waits for the one before it. Dead time builds up.

I want to run the MURF differently. Instead of moving one major workstream at a time, I would move the critical pieces in parallel, connected through one project lead, one master schedule and constant communication. We would launch the major workstreams together:

The goal is not to skip steps. The goal is to stop making every step wait for the last one.

ONE PROJECT. ONE SCHEDULE.
ONE SOURCE OF TRUTH.

Parallel delivery only works if everyone is working from the same information. I would establish a dedicated MURF Project Office with one accountable project lead responsible for integrating all of the workstreams. That team would work from one live critical-path schedule, one decision log, one funding calendar and one project budget.

Residents should also be able to follow the project. A public dashboard should show where we are on design, cost, funding, partnerships, servicing, procurement, risks and schedule. If something moves off schedule, Council and the public should know why and what is being done about it.

PARALLEL DOES NOT
MEAN RECKLESS.

There still need to be clear decision gates. We should not commit taxpayers to full construction while major questions remain unanswered. The work moves forward in parallel, but Council still stops at major checkpoints.

  1. ScopeDo we agree on what we are building?
  2. Business caseDo we understand capital cost, operating cost and project risk?
  3. FundingDo we have a responsible funding stack and municipal contribution?
  4. ConstructionAre design, procurement, financing and schedule ready to move?

That gives us speed and financial discipline.

What should be in it

The final amenity mix has not yet been approved by Council. The feasibility assessment ranked aquatics as the number-one priority, followed by ice and courts, and also identified strong demand for community gathering space, walking space, fitness and other multi-use amenities. My vision is to test a true regional recreation destination built around:

That is a vision, not a blank cheque. The business case needs to determine the right scale for each component based on demand, cost, operating impact, partnerships and available funding. The feasibility assessment itself recommended developing multiple options, ranging from a larger full-service facility to a more modest version focused on the highest-priority amenities. That is exactly the approach I support.

BUILD FOR THE COLLINGWOOD
WE ARE BECOMING.

This facility cannot be designed only for today's population. Collingwood is projected to continue growing significantly over the coming decades, and the property sits close to The Blue Mountains, Clearview and major future-growth areas. The study said doing nothing would be unwise, for two reasons: the town keeps growing, and what we have is already full. It also noted that some of the fastest growth in both towns is happening right at the line between them.

That means the site plan should preserve room to grow. We may not need every future court, rink, pool feature or community space on day one. But we should make sure utilities, parking, access, servicing and the building layout allow expansion without starting over.

  1. Reserve expansion zonesKeep clear areas where another rink, court, wellness or community space could be added.
  2. Plan the circulationEntrances, parking, servicing and internal corridors should anticipate future additions.
  3. Place the plant smartlyMechanical, electrical and back-of-house systems should not sit where future growth needs to go.
  4. Build flexible roomsMovable walls, shared support spaces and multi-purpose rooms where that makes sense.
  5. Phase the programAdd future amenities when demand, partnerships and funding justify them.
  6. Upgrade over timeSystems should be designed so technology can change without rebuilding the building.

MAKE IT REGIONAL
WHERE IT MAKES SENSE.

The first study was done with The Blue Mountains, and it recommended the two towns work together. Sharing the cost buys more building, and two towns asking together make a stronger case for outside money. The Blue Mountains has since continued considering a partnership approach for the next phase of its recreation planning. The new site is close to both The Blue Mountains and Clearview. The Town says that opens the door to sharing the building, and its costs, with our neighbours.

I would bring those conversations back to the table early. That does not mean Collingwood gives up ownership or control. It means asking whether other communities are prepared to contribute through capital funding, operating agreements, guaranteed programming hours, tournament partnerships, shared services or other arrangements. I would also talk to Wasaga Beach, Simcoe County, the school boards, sports clubs and health organizations — wherever there is a clear benefit to Collingwood. A larger demonstrated service area can strengthen the project's business case and make it easier to show broader community impact.

THIS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE

WE HAVE HAD THE MONEY
AND LET IT GO.

In October 2003 council set out how a recreation building would be paid for: $3.3 million from land sales, $2 million borrowed, and $2.54 million from a provincial grant program called Super Build. In February 2004 a new council voted to apply for it and build beside Fisher Field. Eighteen days later the same council reversed itself. The Judicial Inquiry's report says that decision had the effect of turning down Super Build money the Town would otherwise have qualified to receive. Nothing was built.

There may be an earlier one. In his closing submission to the same Inquiry, former Simcoe–Grey MP Paul Bonwick said council had approved a $24 million recreation building at Fisher Field, that roughly $9 million in federal and provincial grants had been approved for it, and that when council rescinded its approval in 2001 those approvals were returned to the two governments.

About that $9 million.

That $9 million is his account, not a finding. The Inquiry's own chapter on how these projects were funded does not mention it, and we have not been able to check it against a federal or provincial grant approval. We are publishing it because it was said on the record, by a named person, to a judge — and because if it is right, it is the most important thing in this history. If you can produce the approval, send it to me and I will say so here.

Money is not the hard part. Being ready when the money appears is the hard part. Both times, the problem was not that Collingwood could not get a grant — it was that the design, the servicing, the operating cost and the politics were not settled enough for the town to hold its nerve. That is why I want design, servicing, financial planning and funding applications running at the same time, with named owners and a public report at every gate, instead of one after another with a decision point in between for the project to die at.

THERE IS A DEADLINE

USE PARTNERSHIPS TO CHASE
MORE OUTSIDE MONEY.

Ontario's Community Sport and Recreation Infrastructure Fund, Stream 2, supports major new and transformative recreation facilities. A town can ask for up to half the cost, to a maximum of $10 million. The Ministry can go above $10 million for what it calls a Signature New Build, but only in unusual cases. The current intake closes on 22 December 2026 at 4:00 p.m.

Government of Ontario, Community Sport and Recreation Infrastructure Fund Stream 2 guidelines

Operating and financial capacity
30%
Community need
25%
Addressing a gap in services
20%
Economic impact
15%
Community support
5%
Value for money
5%

That lines up well with the work the study already did. It is worth reading the scoring closely: the thing the Province weighs most is whether we can afford to run the building once it is open. The fund also recognizes projects that can attract sporting events, tourism and economic activity. A regional partnership does not automatically raise the Province's percentage contribution. What it can do is make a stronger case: more people served, proven need, shared use, tourism and tournaments. And if our neighbours pay a share, that is money Collingwood does not have to find.

BUILD IT AS A
RECREATION DESTINATION.

Community access must come first. But the facility should also be designed to attract tournaments, competitions and regional events. A properly designed combination of ice, courts and aquatics could bring families into Collingwood throughout the year. That supports hotels, restaurants, shops and local businesses while generating facility revenues through rentals, programming, concessions and events. The feasibility assessment itself identified the ability of a larger regional facility to support higher-calibre recreation offerings and tourism as one of the potential benefits of partnership. We should design for that opportunity from the beginning.

KNOW THE OPERATING COST
BEFORE WE BUILD.

Capital cost gets most of the attention on large public projects. Operating cost is what residents pay for every year afterward. Before final construction approval, I want Council and residents to see a realistic operating model. We should know the expected costs of staffing, utilities, maintenance, repairs and lifecycle replacement. We should also know the realistic revenues from memberships, ice rentals, aquatics, court rentals, tournaments, camps, concessions, leased space, sponsorship and programming. The feasibility assessment specifically identifies the operating model, anticipated revenue and expenses, governance and capital requirements as part of the next detailed business-case stage.

The annual taxpayer subsidy should not be a surprise after the doors open.

CONTROL THE COST
BEFORE CONSTRUCTION.

This is a major project, and I will not support an unlimited municipal cheque. The feasibility assessment notes that without a detailed footprint and program it is too early to determine a reliable final construction cost. Its 2025 benchmarking used a broad hard-cost range of approximately $670 to $1,180 per square foot, plus typical soft costs such as architecture and engineering. That range alone shows why scope matters.

Joint Multi-Use Recreation Feasibility Assessment, 2025 benchmarking

Before Council approves construction, I want:

We should also independently re-price the project as design advances, so Council sees cost escalation early instead of after tender.

MY FIRST 90 DAYS

The first 90 days

As Mayor, I would push to establish the parallel delivery structure immediately. My first ninety-day plan for this project would be:

  1. Create the MURF Project Office with one accountable project lead and an integrated staff team.
  2. Confirm the functional program and develop multiple scope options rather than one all-or-nothing concept.
  3. Launch site, servicing and infrastructure work immediately so those issues do not delay design later.
  4. Build the grant strategy now, including a full assessment of the current CSRIF opportunity and other eligible funding.
  5. Re-open formal regional partnership discussions with The Blue Mountains, Clearview, Wasaga Beach, Simcoe County, school boards and other potential partners.
  6. Develop the operating pro forma at the same time as concept design, not afterward.
  7. Determine the preferred procurement and project-delivery method early.
  8. Publish the master schedule and project dashboard so residents can see exactly what needs to happen before shovels go into the ground.

WORK IN PARALLEL.
COMMUNICATE IN SYNC.
GET TO SHOVELS FASTER.

By the end of the first big phase, Collingwood should know seven things: what we are building, what it costs, who is paying in with us, which grants we are chasing, what taxpayers carry, what it costs to run, and when we can start. That is when we move to shovels. Not because we rushed — because we removed unnecessary waiting.

I support the Multi-Use Recreation Facility. But supporting it means more than saying we should build one. It means having a credible plan to design it, finance it, operate it and deliver it. Collingwood has already done a significant amount of the research. The site is being secured. The community has told us recreation matters. Now we need to execute. Do the planning. Line up the funding. Run the work in parallel. Then build it.

The standard every major project has to pass

TELL JONDONATE