Some meagre details of the financial case for disposing of the Castle Fields sports complex are beginning to emerge. The non-cosmetic refurbishment of the swimming pool would cost £453,000.

Like most families faced with a major property refurbishment, South Holland District Council could spread the capital repayment and interest charges over time and the financial impact in any one year would be limited.

The repayment of £500,000 at ten per cent interest over ten years would involve an annual addition to the council's budget of £100,000 in year one, gradually reducing to some £55,000 in year ten. This would equate to a two and half per cent increase in the council tax.

There is an alternative. The district council is debt free. In the report to the Cabinet it was anticipated that the district council had uncommitted capital reserves of £2 million available to invest in the sports village project. Using £500,000 of these reserves to refurbish the swimming pool would involve some loss of interest.

The council is a prudent investor of its savings (your savings) which are largely invested in traditional building societies. At current rates the gross loss of interest would be less than £40,000. The loss of reserves could be repaid over the extended design life of the pool.

I am not aware of any statutory requirement that Section 106 planning agreements could not be negotiated and accumulated to rebuild any reduction in the council capital reserves.

Elsewhere Section 106 planning agreements have been used to subsidise local transport services. A one-year freeze in councillors' remuneration and allowances thereafter rising in line with the Retail Price Index (like many of their electorates' pensions) would further reduce the charge on the council tax payers for refurbishing the swimming pool.

One could ask when last the council managed to spend all the income it received from Government grants, recoupment of business rates and the fees it charges for services, plus your readers' council tax.

And indeed whether the respondents to the first consultation would be willing to pay up to £10 extra on their council tax for improved leisure and sports facilities.

Coun Worth also states that refurbishment would lead to an annual additional management fee of £100,000. Why? There would be no additional facilities and still two sites. Any extra costs arising from the two adjacent sites have surely been factored into the current subsidy that covers management cost of £234,000.

The routine and planned maintenance budget is met by the district council which owns the Castle Fields complex.

I am not persuaded that Spalding's out of town sports village will not require a continuing financial commitment from the council tax payers nor bring enhanced sports and leisure facilities to the people of South Holland.

PAUL WALLS

Claudette Avenue

Spalding