Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Debating the Numbers in the Crowsnest Pass

The debate over numbers continues on Councilor Saindon’s blog he states the following

As for all those new  municipal staff hirings that keep coming up on certain websites, I would ask that when you make comments you should do the research as to the actual net numbers that have been hired to replace those who have left through retirement, resignation or termination. Once you have actually taken the time to get the facts you might be surprised of the results you get”.

Well lets take a better look at the numbers, when the election took place in October of 2010 the municipality had the following positions between administration and office staff.

Administration
CAO-1
Director of Finance-1
Director of Public Works-1
Director of Community Services-1
Director of HR-1
Hourly and Contract Employees
Finance-3
Rec and FCSS-2
Taxation-1
Utilities-1
Inter Departmental-1
Reception-1
HR-1
Development Officer-1
Bylaw-1
Safety-0.5
Public Works-1
Building Inspector-0
(Inspections + safety codes done by Park Enterprises)
Agricultural Fieldman -0.5
Assessor-1 Working on a contract basis  

That was a total of 19 municipal employees comprised of 5 Administrators, 14 Hourly staff and Park Enterprises and the Assessor working on a contract basis

Today we have the following  

Administration
CAO-1
Director of Finance and Corporate Services-1
Director of Planning Engineering and Operations-1
Director of Protective and Community Services-1
(At this time being filled by Transitional Solutions)
Manager of Corporate Services-1
Manager of Operations-1
Fire Chief-1
Hourly and Contract Employees
Finance-3
Rec and FCSS-3
Taxation-1
Utilities-1
Inter Departmental-1
Reception-1
HR-2
Development Officer-1
Bylaw-1 (Will be increased to 2 soon)
Safety-0.5
Public Works-1
Building Inspector-1
(Inspections + safety codes done by Park Enterprises)
Agricultural Fieldman -1
Assessor-1 Working on a contract basis  

That is a total of 24.5 municipal employees comprised of 7 Administrators, 17.5 Hourly staff and Park Enterprises and the Assessor working on a contract basis. I have also only counted 1 bylaw officer at this point, but I am anticipating that this will increase by June 1. So the number then between administration and other office staff will be 25.5 employees.

Now I understand that since the last election the Taxation Clerk and the Development Officer retired. But you can see those positions are filled today and included in the numbers both  in 2010 and now.

If the above positions are not accurate anybody is welcome to email me with the corrected information and I would be glad to change the numbers.

Nobody still wants to answer the question what have we paid consultants? 

I was informed  that the "Weed Inspector" is actually called the "Agricultural Fieldman". It is now corrected, I have not received any other comments regarding errors in my numbers. 

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Our budget process is deafening in its silence. If the administrative restructuring shows up in the budget as something that saves dollars – the council will be very popular. (If the councillors argue that the additional administrators, and their support staff, will discover efficiencies and these will become apparent over the next several years - the taxpayers will not be impressed.) Right now, it appears they are sitting on each other’s heads and agitating for an addition to the municipal office to accommodate all this new hiring. Since they debate so little in public, it is hard to separate fact from fiction. These recommendations are made at the same time as the recommendation to shut down Albert Stella and the Bellevue Seniors Bld. But if you put skate boarders, lacrosse players and other youth that utilize the facility out on the street - the Peace Officers will have more work downtown. Is there a by-law banning skate boarding on the sidewalks?

Anonymous said...

Don't forget the Peace Officers are going to pay for themselves!

Anonymous said...

When pigs fly.......

Anonymous said...

Before:
Administration- 5
Hourly and Contract Employees- 15
Total- 20

After:
Administration- 7
Hourly and Contract Employees- 18.5
Total- 25.5

Increase:
Administration- 2
Hourly and Contract Employees- 3.5
(Rec and FCSS-1
HR-1
Building Inspector-1
Weed Inspector- 0.5)
Total- 5.5

Anonymous said...

So lets say on the conservative side all of these new hirings cost us 300,000.I beleive that will increase every tax bill by about 5%.This is quite the strategic plan!!
Come on council members, show me something positive, anything to justify what you are doing. Maybe explain to me how hiring all of these new people actually helps the CNP.You spoke of ineffeciencies and then you add more staff?

Anonymous said...

The hiring of new people does help the Pass; it gives friends and relatives of the Municipality jobs...and they get paid very well, over $24.00 for a receptionist - please sign me up - someone at the Municipality adopt me please - or befriend me. Sad, no wonder there is never any new blood around.

Anonymous said...

Won't all the taxes from the "New" hotel pay for these positions.
We the taxpayers just have to be patient and fill the gap for a year or two. That's all.

Anonymous said...

Anon 8:38 The New hotel could never be built so the gap of a year or two is highly unlikely.If it is built it would not generate enough tax dollars to pay for all of the new positions.

Anonymous said...

Why are we still using Park Enterprises if we have our own Building Inspector?

Anonymous said...

Alberta Municipal Government Act

217(3) Despite Division 2 of Part 1 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, the chief administrative officer must provide information on the salaries of councillors, the chief administrative officer and designated officers of the municipality.

That should include consultants who are "acting" or "interim" officers.

Crowsnest Pass Home said...

On march 28 I filed a FOIP request to find out what has been spent on consultants since Nov 1,2010.
Under the FOIP act I am suppose to have a response by April 27.
I will post it on my blog when I do get it.
Won't it be ironic if I get the numbers before the councilors do.
In the next few days I will write more about this subject.
The other information you listed above will be in the annual financial statement that should be available by the end of this month.

Anonymous said...

There must be quite a bit of stress in the municipal office as they are doing the financials. Reduction in assessment, limited growth, creeping inflation, increased administrative costs. various legal costs associated with administrative restructuring, consultant costs ( including the latest, and unnecessary, spanking of the subdivision board). The list goes on and each item Is a cost that someone must account for. That someone is the tax payer who is still hoping for a miracle.

Anonymous said...

So let's assume that Devon was paying $500,000 a year in taxes.
Divide by $1200 equals 420 days less days per year that we can use a Consultant.

Anonymous said...

Yes, let's "assume" and make comments without any proof.

Anonymous said...

Devon pays probably a little less than $500,000, but you can be sure that whatever they pay forms a huge portion of the only $6,000,000 of the municipal portion of taxes collected from all the taxpayers. Losing this money will be very significant in the near future. Consultants at $1,200 to $1,500 per day (plus expenses) would be worth their money if they manage to arrange a plan where the municipality could collect less than $6,000,000 after they are gone. Consultants whose advice results in a bigger payroll, especially any additional administrative staff during a time of no growth, should be treated with a dose of common sense scepticism.