Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Crowsnest Pass, Our brand our logo?

This is our logo and new brand how do you feel about it? Do you like it? was it money well spent? looking for opinions? 
Some will argue that it will be paid for out of grant money technically that is true MSI Capital funding what they do not tell you is all the other things that could have been done with that funding check them out at
was the logo/brand a priority? 
What did it cost us? budget $200,000 for entrance signs $50,000 to develop the brand/logo, $20,000 to buy and install banners (150). Three hour meeting with all municipal staff ($35 per hour including benefits), wine and cheese presentation for first dignitaries, and a second presentation for the rest of us. Updating web site, stationary, all municipal documents, placing on all municipal equipment and facilities. Administration and Council time this was not an insignificant burden on the taxpayers.
The reaction I am hearing from citizens while I am campaigning is one "did we really need this" two "I loved the mountain freedom" three "wasn't there better places to spend the money" and four "I don't care if it was $200K, $300K or even $400K it was too much money" 

Note: If anybody wants to dispute my numbers for the costs of the above please post what they believe to be the actual numbers!  


Anonymous said...

in your campaign platform do you want to do away with the brand/logo or are we stuck with it?

Anonymous said...

the logo is very 2 dimensionally superficial for the spectacularly 3 dimensional place we live in. "Naturally Rewarding" is a vacuously indulgent phrase in bureaucratese. Separate or together there is less then an intuitive link to the Pass. And that is what is required in "branding" excellence.
Kindergarten kids with crayons could have done better.
Best description I have heard: dunce caps. Eponymously accurate!

Anonymous said...

"other things that could have been done with that funding"

Just to clarify, there is a quota of MSI funds for each municipality.

They have voted to use $250,000 of our MSI Capital grants to demolish the hospital.
As I read the guidelines, the grants are supposed to go towards acquisition (or "betterment") of municipally owned facilities or infrastructure. They give examples:

I don't see anything there like "knocking down old buildings so we can sell the land to commercial developers".

Anonymous said...

A complete waste of money especially as the 'real thing' is right there to enjoy. Lack of potholes and fresh looking storefronts would stay in the minds of visitors much longer than a sign.

Anonymous said...

Are you saying that if elected, you will dismantle the current branding initiative?

Crowsnest Pass Home said...

4:36 and 4:53

The money that is spent is gone it's not coming back. The entrance signs I would scrap in a heart beat.

Dean Ward

Anonymous said...

The current branding initiative was poorly thought out and poorly executed.

If the memory serves right, Councillor Gallant was in charge of this project, he can correct this if I am wrong.

Nonetheless, branding should not be a priority right off the bat for the new council. There are many more immediate problems which scream for tax dollars.

Anonymous said...

I like the signs and the branding. More importantly, I like the idea behind it. We need to make our community more amenable to development and tourism and things like this help.

Anonymous said...

What else is there to the "branding initiative" besides logos on the website and letterheads?

Dean 6:03 said:
"The entrance signs I would scrap in a heart beat."

Sorry, MSI Capital grants must only be used for "an asset that has an expected life of more than one year". (I wonder how the hospital demolition qualifies.)

Maybe we could make them into some kind of Roadside Attraction:

Anonymous said...

do you have a platform on what you would like to see accomplished in the next four years..if elected.

Anonymous said...

How can Councillor Gallant claim he was fiscally responsible and never voted for tax increases when he is responsible for the rebranding fiasco. How could he vote against the budget when he asked all of us to pay for the rebranding. And don't talk about grants, there were better places for that money. And don't forget the $50,000 for the hotel brand.

Anonymous said...

Gallant says:

"Actually you are wrong. I’m not going to rehash the entire three years or the budget deliberations but I spoke, and voted, against spending in a number of areas. Everything from equipment to staff positions to projects."

He has publicly promoted his spending programs. Shouldn't he have been equally public about his overspending concerns, since he is basing his campaign on fiscal responsibility and improved communication?

BTW, has anyone else bothered to post there? I responded to his question:
"I’m really curious if you are asking other candidates these sorts of questions. Do you challenge them when they put out misleading statements like council paying $400,000 for a logo, or that our strategic plan was written by outsiders? Do you accept these sorts of statements as truth?"
but my response is still awaiting moderation.

He has published and replied to a later comment by Colton.