Crowsnest Pass Home

Random Thoughts from the Crowsnest Pass

2012-01-26T12:00:00.000-08:00

Outstanding taxes: Remember all that discussion about the $1,044,000 that was outstanding in taxes back in early November. The stress that it was putting on the municipal cash flow. Forcing council to up the tax penalty from 21% to 52%, which would solve the problem by encouraging people to catch up fast.

Remember my comments on this issue check them out at:
http://crowsnestpasshome.blogspot.com/2011/12/property-tax-penalties-numbers.html

Council was informed at the G+P meeting on Jan 24 that surprisingly only 17% of those back taxes have been paid. (Check the numbers from any other year I would expect the 17% is very typical). There is still $870,000 outstanding and even more surprisingly 67% of that total is owed by Non-residential taxpayers.

Good News story, Economic update: This is what is so great about the Internet it is a great tool to communicate. On Councilor Gallant’s blog, he posts some very interesting information regarding all the exciting “new” businesses that have opened in the Pass since the beginning of his term.
Check it out for yourself at: http://briangallant.ca/wordpress/2012/01/23/celebrate-businesses-old-and-new/
Road Closure last week: Felt badly for anybody that was stranded in the Pass, I expected a much larger problem with our largest hotel shut down for the winter (50 rooms not available). Amazingly two things happened many people heading this way knew about the road conditions so did not come. Which was evident by the fact that there were still hotel rooms available at 8pm that night and as you can read in the Promoter’s editorial, today people pulled together and looked after those that needed assistance.

I thought Sparwood would have been much worse with the hundreds of miners trapped over there, but they did what the Pass and most communities do in these types of situations they pulled together.
http://www.elkvalleyherald.ca/index3.htm despite having much larger numbers of people trapped than we did, only 21 people had to sleep on a cot at the recreation centre.

Thunder in the Valley: This is Councilor Saindon’s project he stated this week that the committee would be meeting in council chambers on the 30th, with the RCMP. He also reported that the committee as now had three meeting and is moving forward; anybody that is interested is welcome to attend the meeting. In conjunction with that, Mayor Decoux started reading a letter from the Blairmore Fireworks committee requesting a meeting with council at the Blairmore Fire Hall, Mayor Decoux stated that if they wished to meet with council they could come as a delegation in front of council.
Sad to read that unless some new volunteers step forward there will not be a show and shine this year, I know many people including myself that really enjoyed that.

Stupid story of the week: I was confronted this morning by an older fellow who was really anger because somebody had “alleged” that previous council had spent $1 million moving the tenants from the Crowsnest Centre to the MDM. I asked him three things; one do you or anybody else have any kind of evidence to substantiate that number. Two was the source of this information the same one that “alleged” that we would lose our Food Bank and Education Consortium. Three this council is now entering its second budget process, it will have its second opportunity to put the funding in place if the centre is truly such a high priority for this community.

Cost of consultants: Sounds like we the taxpayers are going to receive this information on Councilor Gallant’s blog today in a response to a question about the cost of consultants he replies with the following:

“I do not know offhand how much we spent on consultants. We need to hire professionals for specific projects from time to time and I suspect it’s no higher than any other year. I believe we paid approximately $5,000 to have the Task Force document written but I could be wrong since I do not have the information here. There was also a small gift given to the members of the task force of approximately $200 each, and they had travel expenses covered by the municipality. All of this information will be available in March when we receive our audited financial statements. If you want it earlier, please contact Finance at the municipal office.

Stream lining of the municipal office: I hear through the grapevine that the new Director of Public Works, Engineering and planning will be commencing his duties shortly.

Questions are being asked in the Crowsnest Pass.

2012-01-17T13:06:00.000-08:00

Often I have people ask me questions about the political situation in the Crowsnest Pass. So I will take the time to address the most common questions being asked over the last couple of months.

What is your opinion of this new schedule for council meetings?

Since Mayor Decoux and his group of councilors took over there as been 55 meeting of council (Including Council, G+P, Special meeting, Organizational etc up to December 6th 2011)
The average duration of those meeting has been 2 hours and 28 minutes of which 58 minutes on average have been in camera. That means the average resident has had the opportunity to see their council at work making the decisions that impact every one of us for a grand total of six hours a month.
Now I know that most people don't go to council meeting, lets face it the majority of people don't vote.
Why not lessen the number of elections?

But that's not the point, the public must have the opportunity if they so choose to see their council at work, in a community that has a lot of people that work 12 hour shifts and out of town the opportunity must be provided.
Previous council met every Tuesday (as recommended by the Cuff report) this gave every person four opportunities a month to drop by the municipal office and see their council at work if they wished.

During December, January and now February council has been testing a schedule where they meet on only two days a month one day for just a council meeting. A second day for a G+P meeting in the afternoon and then a council meeting at night. Depending on shift schedules a person may never have the opportunity to attend a meeting.

Is their a lot of debate at the council meeting?

I don't think so, I keep telling people to come to a meeting and check it out for themselves. Some more interesting numbers, most of us know that you can't make motions In Camera at the average meeting there are 14 motions made, council is only in the public realm for 90 minutes a meeting that means on average a motion is being made every six minutes. Would anybody consider there to be a lot of debate?

Do you feel the strategic plan as been successful?

I respond with what do you think? outside of the Bellevue Library closing, name me one other change. Believe it or not I still get people saying well they consolidated the Blairmore/Coleman shop.

How much are we spending on consultants?

That comes up again and again I am going to request those numbers soon from the municipality, will I be provided them who knows.

Are my taxes going up this year?

My answer is I believe so, but I always caution don't just watch your taxes. Follow franchise fees, user fees, etc.

Do you think the back tax rate increase had a significant effect on the amount of outstanding back taxes?

Financial statements will be out near the end of April I will compare this years numbers with last.

Just some things to think about and hopefully create some debate

Happy New Year, Looking ahead to 2012 in the Crowsnest Pass

2012-01-04T14:11:00.000-08:00

Well the turkey was gobbled down and the fireworks were set off now its time to see what 2012 will bring for us the good residents of the Crowsnest Pass. Weather you live in Crowsnest Pass East or Crowsnest PassWest I am sure one or more of the following will be of interest to every one of you.

Strategic plan: The fanfare will continue there will be lots of talk, more studies, great plans, procedures and policies will continue to be created, reviewed and rewritten. Tangible changes that actually affect the lives of the residents in positive timely ways we will see.

2011 census: First results are expected to be out in February last census our community saw the largest decline in population in the province (percentage wise 8% +) and we became the oldest average aged community. Will all the hiring at the mines over the last couple of years change that?

2012 Cupe collective bargaining, there will ultimately be an agreement between the two parties. How will the process play out, some people ran for office based on finding the “efficiencies” this is their opportunity. Efficiencies in collective bargaining usually involve somebody giving something up. Will that happen? John Irwin used to always brag about the last time CUPE walked out, it did not snow for the next two months. We have had an awful pleasant winter so far.

Municipal Financial Audit: It is like a report card for Council and Administration usually comes in around April, I anticipate based on the numbers so far that the municipality will show a slight surplus for last year. Watch the revenue side of the audit it will probably be $2-300,000 higher than anticipated a great way to make one’s self look good.

It will also be very interesting to see what the outstanding taxes are in the audit at the end of the year after everybody had the fear of 51% penalties waved in their face for the last two months.

Three-year budget: Council is working on having a budget in place for the end of March. Areas I and I am sure many other taxpayers will be watching. Tax increases (lets not forget some councilors ran on the position of no tax increases), plus lets watch for the old fashioned tax increases that we don’t call tax increases; franchise fees, user fees, new revenue sources, (water meters, etc). Will council continue down the path of increasing the number of staff, while not replenishing the municipal reserves in addition to increasing the municipal debt load 2012 will tell?

Crowsnest Centre property plan: I’m sure in the not to distant future there will be presented to council a consultant’s report that will surprisingly state the centre sits on a prime commercial site that’s serviced, accessible to highway 3 and has 12000 vehicles a day traveling along it. The issue that will raise its head, is nobody will touch that site without the old hospital being removed, unless the municipality gives the site away. Will the taxpayers be willing to take on a million dollars worth of debt to remove it?

River Run properties: Somewhere in 2012 I suspect some of the investors will approach the municipality looking for a break on the back taxes in return for some minimal development on that property.

New recreation facility: Many people are talking about this; there is even a group that has recently been formed to work on this project. My argument was that this community did not have the tax base or the willingness of all those that live here on a fixed income to subsidize an indoor swimming pool. In fact I listen to a councilor at the last public forum talk about how the taxpayers have had to bear the “burden” of subsidizing a ski hill for years, quite a revelation when you consider that Pincher spends yearly 6-7 times what we spend on our ski hill to maintain there indoor pool. I was pleasantly surprised to hear that this group does not only have the intention to fundraise to build a facility but also to raise additional funds to operate it. I wish them nothing but the best an Indoor facility with no addition costs to the taxpayers I would support that in a heartbeat.

Note: For those that wish to help with this worthy cause I would suggest that check out the following: Crowsnest Can Do Cultural and Recreation Society page on
Facebook, or email crowsnestcando@gmail.com

Bigger government: Remember how the municipality was stream lined from four departments to three. Remember at the beginning of this council’s term there were five management employees. Soon there will be seven. Will that number get even larger when and if the municipality stops using consultants?

Consultants: Wouldn’t we the taxpayers like to know what its cost us so far? The interim CAO, putting together our community peace officer program, the Crowsnest Centre, the new Fire Chief. Will we find out in 2012 will there be an end to this costly process? Remember the moment a consultant says everything here looks good our job is done the paycheck stops.

The democratic process: The last council was slammed consistently for 4-3 votes (which if anybody was counting happened in less than 5% of all votes). Up to now watching this council over the last fifteen months it has appears quiet the opposite, meeting with very little debate and very often decisions made by unanimous vote. Over the last month, I have seen Councilor Sage be the exception to this rule a few times. It will be interesting to see what this year brings; there is a name for governments that operate with no opposition.

Optimistic: How could you not be, we live in one of the most beautiful places in the world, there are lot’s of good people that live here. I hope this community stays affordable for all those that are, or soon to be seniors. I hope this community is careful to remember that its great to have dreams and aspirations but somebody must pay for them. We must also live within our means not just now but down the road.

Lastly “Consolidation of Blairmore/Coleman shop” will this really happen or was that press release last July just a poor attempt to show us that “change” was happening? On the other hand, is this a great example of how change will be instituted in this community?

2012 will indeed be an interesting year.

Feel free to leave your comments regarding these issues or any others.

Need work "we" are hiring

2011-12-14T11:22:00.000-08:00

By "we" I mean the good taxpayers of the Crowsnest Pass.

Just a matter of a few months ago our leaders hired a "New" Public Works Manager, I entered the G+P meeting last night just as the Mayor was introducing the "New" Fire Chief.

If you take a moment to click over to the Municipality site @ http://www.town.crowsnestpass.ab.ca/finance-a-administration/employment you will see "we" are also in the process of hiring a Building Inspector/Safety codes officer, Development Officer, Director of Planning, Engineering and Operations, and a Manager of Corporate Services.

Wow if I was on the negotiating committee for CUPE I would be rubbing my hands and thinking what a wonderful year 2012 is going to be, nothing better for bargaining than an employer that's flush with cash and willing to spend it.

Least we forget "we" still have the Director of Community Services to come. Does anybody believe that it will end there?

Interesting video from You tube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge4X86CxOUY this story was pointed out to me by one of my reqular readers. Its from the USA but pretty much in line with what's going on in the Pass of course on a much smaller scale. Please take a couple of minutes and check it out.

Property Tax Penalties, Numbers separating the facts from the BS.

2011-12-12T12:56:00.000-08:00

The bs on this property tax penalty issue gets deeper and deeper.

First of all I will start out by saying yes everybody should pay their taxes on time, their bank payments, credit card bills, utilities etc, in a perfect world they would. This world is far from perfect and that’s why all of the above get to charge you interest on the outstanding balance on your account.

I quote from Councilor Gallants blog. “Our Director of Finance and Systems confirmed that over half of the total is residential homes and businesses, while the remaining 46% or so is attributable to land developments and other parties.”

So I said 50% they say 46% not much of a difference. I do not know of anybody that’s saying almost all these back taxes are tied to one developer.

So do you think this penalty will have an impact on the 46%? No, they will just owe more. Out of the other 54% I expect most of the businesses will clean up their accounts so who will the 50% penalty impact? Residents who find themselves in the unfortunate position of not being able to pay their taxes.

Some people are still talking about the previous penalty being one of the lowest in the province at 10%. It was not 10%, it was 10% on June 30th and another 10% on January 1st which compounds to 21% annually.

Now we can be proud we will have one of the highest rates in the province.

So let’s talk about numbers under the old tax penalty a home owner that did not pay their taxes for three years on a home with a annual tax bill of $1800 would by the time their home went to a tax sale owe $8002 of which $5400 would be back taxes and $2602 in penalties

Now that same home owner will owe $13253 of which $5400 would be back taxes and $7853 would be penalties.

That’s a whopping $5251 difference in penalties!

I hear the line that people not paying their back taxes is putting pressure on the municipality to cut services due to shortfalls in revenue, what a crock. Last year the budget for taxes was $6,439,407 how short was the municipality on its tax revenue? Not one penny $6,765,427 came in $326,020 more than anticipated.

Fact over the last six years $34,407,633 in tax dollars was budgeted to come in, the actual dollars that were collected $34,806,978.

Then I hear the line people are investing their money elsewhere instead of paying their taxes (its getting deep now) according to the Globe and Mail today the top paying mutual fund in Canada over the last 12 months was the “Canadian Long term fixed Income Fund” that gained 12.69%.

Can you imagine all the conversations around the Pass the last year that went like this “Martha lets not pay our taxes this year and incur the 21% penalties, instead we will take that money and invest it in the Canadian Long term fixed Income Fund we could be making up to 12.69%.

Then I hear the line “the taxpayers that do pay on time are being penalized by these people that owe back taxes”. That is not the case, every tax dollar that was projected to come in over the last six year came in and more.

Second if you look in the municipalities audited financial statements they have collected $385,993 in penalties in that timeframe. The municipality every year budgets under revenue for an average of $55,000 to come in from penalties, so if these dollars are not there where do you think that revenue will come from?

Yes your right the rest of us will be penalized.

The present system works every year somewhere around 3-5 taxpayers are threatened with a tax sale out of 4500 tax notices that go out. Less than one tenth of one per cent.

Note: If you disagree with the penalties you can do the following:

Phone Marion Vanoni at 403-562-8833 or email her at finance@crowsnestpass.com.
Or phone the municipality and ask for a list of the council members phone numbers and give them a call.

The call you make today may well reflect on what tax increases you see this coming June, I have always said politicians love nothing more than silence.

The drive to seven is on. Paying for it.

2011-12-08T11:36:00.000-08:00

After a year of task forces, strategic planning, creation of policy and procedures.
We learnt just a few weeks back that the municipality has been stream lined from the previous cumbersome structure of four departments each with a director reporting to the CAO for a total administration team of five people.
Down to a thrifty three departments with a team of up to six administrators reporting to a CAO for a total administration team of seven people.

Today I see the next step to the drive to seven is in motion the Director of Planning-Engineering and Operations has been posted. http://www.aamdc.com/classifieds/jobs/guest/detailjob/141-director-of-planning-engineering-and-operations

People keep asking me around town how are they going to pay for all of these positions plus the strategic plan.
I see a number of ways they are going to achieve this.

1. The strategic plan some of those issues are a one time cost so they need to find some easily accessible money. (Back taxes with the big jump in penalties they are anticipating great globs of money to flow in next year prior to those penalties kicking in)

2. Savings from the collective agreement the contract with CUPE is up on January 31st, it was not by accident that Councilor Mitchell was replaced with Councilor Saindon on the bargaining committee I suspect they will probably bring in a high priced lawyer or consultant to assist in this process. There is potentially large savings in the collective agreement the only problem is you have to get the folks sitting on the other side to agree to those changes.

3. The perpetual money generators (more often referred to as taxpayers) the message as already been sent with the increase in franchise fees, ($200,000 per year) and a tax increase last spring of 2% that most people anticipated to be zero.

4. User fees I anticipate that a lot of the fees that people use to pay for various municipal services will be increased.

5. Funding for external groups, many organizations receive funding from the municipality; Museum, Allied arts, Underground mine, Women's Centre etc etc I think you will see less funding for these types of groups.

6. New assessment most people don't realize that every year new assessment increases the tax base by 1-2% which should easily in today's economy cover any cost of living increases the municipality incurs.

It will be interesting six months from now to look back at this list and see how accurate my predictions were!

Does the right hand know what the left is doing?

2011-12-01T12:21:00.000-08:00

Interesting story in the Crowsnest Promoter this week "Municipality appeals controversial development" available at http://www.crowsnestpasspromoter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3385896

Now we have entered the dawn of the new era in the Crowsnest Pass where policies and procedures set the way that business is done.
This story makes one ask many questions the subdivision board makes a decision that is unanimously passed with two members of council sitting on that board.
The CAO had discussions with members of council and had their support did this include the two councilors that sat on this board, does that include the member of council that sits on the appeal board if not then to have a majority it means every other member of council supports him?
What position will the SDB and its members take at the appeal board?
Why was the applicant not told to rezone?
The proposed development is not compatible with the present downtown commercial businesses in the immediate area?
The municipality also has concerns that the proposed development is inappropriate from a planning standpoint?
Why were these issues not raised by administration or the two councilors at the SDB?

Its going to take quite a policy to ensure that this never happens again

Council Meeting of Nov 29, 2011 Crowsnest Pass

2011-12-01T11:50:00.000-08:00

Occasionally where time as allowed I have been posting minutes of some of the council and G+P meeting.

Now Council as decided that they will post approved minutes by noon of the following day, after some members of council suggested that they had been approached by members of the public questioning why this was not being done.

Some people suggested to me that the only reason they were doing it was to out communicate myself with the general public. Wow does my blog really have that much power? I won't take any credit for that.

Back to the point of my post I am not going to do minutes as long as the municipality does they are coming out in a very timely fashion now and I know that the lady that does them can do a far better job than I do.

So if you are interested in the council minutes all you have to do is go to the municipal web site http://www.town.crowsnestpass.ab.ca/ you will find them underneath the council agenda column.

This of course will not stop me from commenting on these meeting as we all know minutes don't provide you
with everything that happens at a meeting.

"Revised Municipal Reserve Policy and Procedure"

I found Councilors Londsbury comment about this policy very telling. "First line of the policy states "The Municipality shall establish Capital and Operational Reserves" this is all well and good but will we have any money to place in reserves?"

Especially when you consider that in 2011 not a dollar was placed into such reserves.

Best of intentions mean nothing unless they are followed up, and as far as reserves the Mayors attempt at humour by saying I will give you a quarter if needs be to make sure something goes in there, does not cut it.

River Run Vistas Investors Meeting Update

2011-11-30T14:15:00.000-08:00

I see my fellow blogger beat me to it http://blog.johnprince.ca/ but here it is the audio from the River Run Vistas Meeting on the weekend.www.adita.com/mintoft/mintoft.html

I do feel bad for the investors, I hope they can come up with a resolve that works for them and gets some of their money back. Mr Mintoft comes across as a very smooth talking sales man but then so did the two fellows he used to be in business with, (well technically still is). But the investors will do whats best for them, there is one part of the tape where it sounds like he is going to talk to the municipality about the outstanding taxes. That concerns me especially now the bylaw to increase the penalties on back taxes as gone through first reading. Will the old timers on a fixed income be given a break on those outstanding taxes because they made some poor choices.

River Run Vistas Investors-Information

2011-11-23T09:37:00.000-08:00

We will be having a meeting with Jon Mintoft for all interested Vistas investors on Saturday November 26 from 2:00 - 4:00 p.m.

The location is the Fish Creek Public Library located at 11161 Bonaventure Drive SE in Calgary.

I urge everyone to attend. This is our opportunity to determine whether the revised proposal from Olympia Trust is in our best interest.

Please come prepared with your questions for Jon. There will be an open mic where you can come forth to pose your questions. If you are a little uncomfortable getting up to speak in front of the group, then please email your questions directly to me and I will ask them on your behalf.

Questions that are emailed to me will be asked in the order that I receive them, starting immediately. I will log every question that I receive and place them in a queue for presenting to Jon at the meeting.

Although we will be making an audio recording of the meeting and posting it on the Internet, I'm looking for a very good turnout because few investors have actually met Jon Mintoft. This is your chance at long last!

Jon and I look forward to seeing you on Saturday, November 26. [Please arrive about 10 minutes early.]

Remember to get your questions ready.

All the best,

Myron Achtman

The Shell Game

2011-11-22T13:25:00.000-08:00

On November 17, I wrote this post: http://crowsnestpasshome.blogspot.com/2011/11/financing-councils-dreams-another-pot.html

Over the last week, I have heard many statements regarding the issue of back taxes:

Lets address some of these comments going back to my original post, remember I said in my mind there are three catergories of taxpayers in arrears.

One being the 50-60% that is owed by a developer, second the people that miss the deadline for one reason or another and have no incentive to pay until the end of the year and third the people that just can’t or struggle to pay.

So back to the comments being made:

1- "The current 10% penalty is one of the lowest in the province and hardly a deterrent". First of all that’s just plain not true if you don’t pay your taxes you get nailed with 10% in June and a further 10% Jan 1st. (By my math that’s 20%)

2- “People are using there money elsewhere by not paying their taxes”. Certainly would not make a lot of sense to be delinquent on a bill that I am going to be charged 20% interest on versus investing the cash in a term deposit at 1-2%.

3- “Yes, some of those unpaid taxes are from developers such as RiverRun etc” How do we determine that? Maybe the problem as been going on for years?. In the audited municipal financial statements there is a section called notes, under that is a sub section titled “Taxes and Grants in place of Taxes receivable” lets look at the last five years.

• 2006-Total $203,669

• 2007-Total $244,727

• 2008-Total $268,400

• 2009-Total $357.519

• 2010-Total $570,581

Notice the numbers don’t really take a big jump until 2009 I think that really reinforces my argument that 50-60% of the arrears are owed by a developer, spilt 2010’s number in half and your almost back to the 2008 number.

4-“ but we have numerous residents who play the shell game every year.” “Numerous” that’s a fairly harsh word, the municipality sends out at least 4500 tax notices a year in my six years on council there was years we saw alarmingly high numbers of people faced with tax sales for being three years behind. Some years as high as 5 or 6. Yes everybody should pay their bills on time but we are not even talking about 1% of our taxpayers going to a tax sale we are talking about one tenth of one per cent. I think once you pull out the number owed by that one developer above you will find that we are very comparative to other communties in Alberta in addition to the historical number for the Crowsnest Pass.

5-Lets assume for a moment we became that unique municipality where everybody paid there taxes on time where would that traditional $40-50,000 in interest income come from?

Financing councils dreams (Another Pot of Gold)

2011-11-17T09:43:00.000-08:00

My fellow blogger Mr Prince has posted an article regarding the issue of taxes in arrears http://blog.johnprince.ca/ . At the public forum on November 9th the Mayor raised the issue of taxes in arrears, specifically the fact that this year there is over $1,040,000 outstanding. Then he went on to talk about how some people are consistently year after year behind on their taxes (which is not illegal) and stated that if they are going to continue to do this it is going to cost them more and more.
Presently if your taxes are not payed on time you get hit with a 10% penalty on June 1st plus a further 10% on January 1st, (Yes that's 20% per year) it sounds like the Mayor's intention is to increase that.

First impression is this is simple everybody should pay their taxes on time and if they don't make them pay.
It's never that simple.

I suspect that probably 50-60% of the outstanding back taxes are owned by developers that will never see the light of day again, slap them with 30-40-50% whatever you like its not going to get the bill paid they will just owe the municipality more. That issue will ultimately get resolved in a back tax sale. (Maybe if somebody bids on the property the only thing that changes by charging that group more is the need to recover a greater amount of dollars at the sale)

The second issue is sometimes you have either residential or business owners that for one reason or another miss the deadline by a matter of days. That's a problem with having a set date that you are charged 10-15-20% if you have not paid by that date, why would you pay before December 31st. If I know that I have been charged the penalty anyway why would I not hold on to my money for an extra six months its not going to cost me any more. There is no Incentive to pay once you have missed the deadline why not charge the 10% on the due date and then discount the penalty if you come in prior to the next deadline.

The next issue and this gets back to the fundamental issue in the Crowsnest Pass the average home owner is now paying roughly $2000 a year in taxes plus close to another $65 a month in Water/Sewer/Garbage plus your utility bills are going up another $5 a month on January 1st. Add all those things together you come up with $237 per month, lets not lose site of probably 60% of our homeowners live on a fixed income.
AISH pays $1188 per month, we have a lot of seniors living on less than $30,000 a year we have reached the point where they are spending 10% of their income just on maintaining the municipality.

So in my opinion you have three groups of late taxpayers:
One being the development company that will only pay its taxes through a tax sale.
Two those that for what ever reason are late on their taxes and really have no incentive to pay prior to the next deadline.
Three those that for either economic or financial reasons just can't keep up.

So if council wishes to increase the rates I can think of only one group above that its really going to have an impact on.

There is no big pot of gold here that's going to finance all those great ideas that were brought up last week and many years prior.

Great Expectations in the Crowsnest Pass! Realized or still just Smoke and Mirrors (Part 3)

2011-11-15T11:11:00.000-08:00

Next issue on the agenda was the Protective and Community Services Reorganization which is available at the address below.

http://www.town.crowsnestpass.ab.ca/component/docman/doc_download/1234-protective-a-community-services-organizational-chart

Next after just what everybody needed to make the evening a little long (Coffee Break) the Mayor turned the forum over to Mr Robin’s the Interim CAO, I give the guy credit despite what sounded like a terrible cold he did a very clear precise presentation.

Mr Robin’s first spoke about what a wonderful job all the people in the fire and rescue department do, he made it clear that there was no intention to get rid of fire departments just to make the coverage we had better. He spoke to how there was rumors floating around that a lot of people were upset with the new approach. After ten minutes he gave me the impression that all the affected parties were on board with the only issue left to be resolved being setting up a roster to provide the necessary coverage. Which he was waiting for the fire chiefs to bring back to him.

Then the question was asked by a member of the audience how many new positions were being added to which he replied one the full time Fire Chief which will come at a cost of $105,000 (Wages and Benefits)

Now I’m not buying that the cost of this is going to be $105,000 a year. Let’s go through the different additions at the end of 2010 there was the following in this department:

Director of Community Services who was making less than the proposed amount for the Fire Chief.
There was no Fire Chief there.
Under FCSS there was one full time person.
Under Recreation there was one full time person.
Bylaw Officer there was one position.
Agricultural Fieldman was a part time position.

So what additional costs will be incurred? These are my estimates but I would have no problem being “proven” wrong.

Director of Community Services who will now have his position expanded to cover the Protective Services area. Minimum at least $30,000 (Wages and Benefits)

Fire Chief $105,000 (Wages and Benefits) plus lets not forget the cost of a pickup, cell phone, uniform, courses, computer, etc $30,000)

One additional full time person under FCSS $61,000 (Wages and benefits)

One additional full time person under Recreation $61,000 (Wages and Benefits)

Bylaw Officer I only see one on the chart? council is in the process of changing this to a community peace officer with the indication that a further peace officer will be hired $86,000 per year plus the cost of a pickup, cell phone, etc $30,000

Agricultural Fieldman used to be a part time position which the former Director found grant money for to turn it into a full time position the only question here is what happens after the three year grant runs out.

Total additional costs for next year:
Director $30,000
Fire Chief $135,000
FTE FCSS $61,000
FTE REC $61,000
Peace Officer $58,000 (Only used half year cost)

Total additional costs $345,000 per year this makes no allowance for additional increases in honouriums, on call allowances, or increased hourly rates for firemen or rescue squad members.

Where will the money come from?

Great Expectations in the Crowsnest Pass! Realized or still just Smoke and Mirrors (Part 2)

2011-11-12T11:00:00.000-08:00

Next came the presentation of the Top 40 initiatives to turn our community around. At this point Mayor Decoux allowed each member of council to stand up to present a page or two of his strategic plan.
I have listed each point and included a short comment with each.

1. Improve the way we do business through enhanced
planning, processes, procedures and communications.
All good things that every council does, very costly MDP will be at least $60,000

2. Establish a systematic, orderly and universal process for development.
Every development is unique especially in an area like this, can one size fit all work?

3. Conduct a feasibility study to determine which Municipal buildings need to be replaced or consolidated.
Previous councils started this process the information provided allowed the cost of this to drop to $54,000 instead of $95,000.

4. Review municipal organizational structure.
Will talk about this again later but previously we had four departments with five administrators we will now have three departments with up to seven administrators.

5. Create one Crowsnest Pass Fire and Rescue Department with one Chief and multiple Substations.
Will talk about this again later.

6. For programs and services provided, ensure all revenue opportunities are maximized. This is usually code for "how much more do we have to pay"

7. Establish a Community Economic Development Advisory Committee.
Hopefully this is not going to be a the same people as Community Futures(nothing against those people, let them carry on doing their job)we do not need to duplicate what they are already doing we
need to have new people with new ideas involved.

8. Create a plan to attract new development, business and industry.
Every council talks about this and wants to attract new business can be very costly especially when you start talking about "Offer incentives for relocation of industry" or "the addition of an Economic Development Officer"

9. Explore opportunities for enhanced post-secondary education and Centres of Excellence in the community.
Centre of Excellence in Field Studies in Crowsnest Pass. as been ongoing for at five years.

10. Explore the advantages and disadvantages of being in the power distribution business.
Our electrical distribution system as been subsidizing our power rates for thirty years.

11. Raise the profile of Crowsnest Pass with external audiences including the development of an integrated website.
Previous council looked at this very expensive to create and maintain.

12. Once new website is in place, launch a high intensity integrated communications strategy to support economic development activities.
Work with advertising agency to develop and implement this strategy. This will not come cheap.

13. Move forward on the implementation of the key recommendations of the approved Visitor Friendly Tourism Development Plan.
Consider marketing seed money through Council budget. Just a matter of money.

14. Establish a committee to review and re-develop Rum Runner Days and Thunder in the Valley with a focus on increasing safety and increasing potential for economic benefit to the community and local businesses.
I look forward to the improvements this coming July, this weekend as become extremely expensive for the municipality. But is so important To our business sector.

15. Raise the visibility of the multi-use, multi-season trail system as the premier North American attraction for these activities.
Absolutely future councils need to continue the good work that prior councils began over the last six years keep in mind that 95% of the funding for trails was in place or had been applied for prior to this council taking office.

16. Establish a Tourism Board to advise Council.
Another cost who will lead, administrate, pay for.

17. Seek opportunities to develop events that will attract tourists to Crowsnest Pass.
All councils have done this in the past, its not that long ago a group came to council with a really great idea, that council embraced and encouraged in every way it could "Sinister 7"

18. Review Terms of Reference, accountability and marketing of Pass Powderkeg to ensure economic sustainability.
All recreation facilities are subsidized, the question is always how many and to what degree. If anybody believes this facility places a burden on the taxpayer wait until you get an indoor swimming pool.

19. Achieve agreement with the Government of Alberta on the location and the timing of the realignment of Highway 3 so that this can be included in the Municipal Development Plan.
This as already been addressed the word "agreement" almost gives the impression that both parties were involved, the reality as always been that the province "tells"

20. Complete a Commercial Feasibility Study and Develop a Site Master Plan for the Former Crowsnest Centre.
It was appreciated hearing the Mayor agree with the previous position of council that the municipality could not afford this facility, that it had tremendous problems and the best thing was to make the site available for a hotel.

21. Develop an enhanced relationship with the provincial and federal governments and lobby for increased employment opportunities in Crowsnest Pass.
The Mayor was right most levels of government are centralizing their facilities not expanding.

22. Build partnerships and networks to enhance ongoing economic development opportunities.
All councils do this on an ongoing basis I look forward to the results over the next two years. The only problem when you get more than two parties together everybody sees a sense of entitlement for themselves and expects the largest piece of the pie.

23. Develop a strategy to enhance amenities for families and seniors to attract long-term residents to the community.
I hope we can find enough money to afford the amenities we have without increasing taxes.

24. Lobby the provincial government to retain and maintain the wilderness access roads for tourism and recreation activities.
This is all about the Atlas road and as been ongoing for a number of years. Spray Lakes is almost finished logging in that area. Many groups including the municipality want to maintain that road bottom line will be who steps up to the plate to pay for it.

25. Establish a dialogue with stakeholders regarding the expansion of Crowsnest Pass.
This as been going on for years, its basically hoping that one of our neighbours will give up some of its tax base to increase ours. Check out Cold Lakes efforts over the last fifteen years.

26. Approach the provincial government relative to a Crowsnest Pass Unique Area designation.
Last council convinced the province to give us special status, which allowed us to access both rural and urban grants. Council prior to that used the Crowsnest Regulation to have the province pay for our policing. You can only go cap in hand so many times.

27. Imbed a Heritage Resources Strategy in the Municipal Development Plan.
All councils have looked at and encouraged the development of our historical resources. Last council initiated the municipal heritage board.

28. Establish the historic neighbourhoods of Crowsnest Pass and develop appropriate signage.
Good luck with this issue it will be ongoing long after I'm gone and yes there will be costs.

29. Redefine the Terms of Reference of the Culture and Recreation Board as an advisory board to Council.
Is this really necessary? is there enough to justify two boards in these area does the Municipality have the resources to reach the goals of two separate groups.

30. Establish a Housing Advisory Committee.
The market place will decide what type of housing is required. Unless council is looking at affordable housing which will require the involvement of a developer, plus the municipality making either land or cash available.

31. Seek opportunities to work with regional partners to provide programs and services.
The neighbours have been doing this for years a good example is the regional landfill. Other opportunities should be looked at.

32. Commence rebranding strategy for Crowsnest Pass and redefine the image of the community.
Nothing wrong with promoting the community previous council looked at this, the biggest issue as always will be who foots the bill.

33. Create a Community Enhancement Strategy.
This process began with the previous council who took the brave step of bringing in a community standards bylaw. I hope this council never has to sit through the public meetings we did. The majority of last council recognized the importance of cleaning up our community.

34. Promote Crowsnest Pass as one community.
It will probably take not one more council but one more generation to achieve this.

35. Create a Master Green Space and Parks Plan.
I was under the impression that our previous community services director had started working on this a long time ago. Most people don’t know that we have twenty plus parks and it takes $50-80,000 to equip each one.

36. Explore servicing of existing industrial parks.
Just a matter of money and priorities the last number we had thrown at us was $15 million to Sentinel, and $3 million for Frank. Keep in mind if you are using your grants for this you won't be getting money for Infrastructure around town.

37. Address heavy truck parking issues through appropriate Bylaws.
This will be a very timely and costly issue to enforce. I remember the direct route issue with OHV's.

38. Investigate options for solid waste reduction and recycling.
If this community does curb side recycling at no additional cost to the taxpayers it will be famous.

39. Develop an emergency road connecting Blairmore and Coleman.
We have one and was told by previous administration that it would meet our needs.

40. Explore issues regarding random camping.
Enforcement issue,that will again be very timely and costly.

Note further comments: Most of these ideas are good very few of them new I would say probably 90% have been seen in previous reports. The number one issue here is going to be what every other councils ran into when they looked at these ideas, how do you pay for them. There is very little in this plan that does not include some sort of costs in most cases anywhere from the $1,000's to many millions.
During the election campaign we heard so many times about finding the inefficiencies, cutting the fat maybe that was going to be a source of revenue to do all of the above. Then I see a council go on to hire numerous new people and build layers of bureaucracy. This council or any further council can not lose sight of the fact that 60% of our population is on a fixed income and usually not a large one. Just this week they are advertising for a Building Inspector.

Then maybe the Mayor has some different ideas he put up a slide of Municipal costs on there were four areas chosen randomly (Politicians as seasoned as Mayor Decoux seldom picks numbers randomly).
Those areas were Municipal Payroll (almost $5,000,000) Cupe agreement expires December 31st.
Swimming Pool $160,000, Albert Stella Arena $78,000 and the Ski Hill $165,000.

Regardless the single largest issue is how are you going to pay for the above?

Great Expectations in the Crowsnest Pass! Realized or still just Smoke and Mirrors (Part 1)

2011-11-10T13:32:00.000-08:00

Went to the town hall meeting last night with much anticipation of all the wonderful things that were going to happen, lots of chatter on the streets people were excited. I thought back to last November when Mayor Decoux spoke about bringing forth three Notices of Motion regarding the Crowsnest Centre, the River Run property plus duplications of services by May of 2011. I thought back more recently to Councilor Saindon’s blog post of Nov 3, “Good news to be announced on Nov 9!

So yes I expected lots, I even considered for a while that maybe my positions on some of these issues were out to lunch. But that’s ok prove me wrong. Any way it started out with the Mayor telling everybody a story about a past experience he had with another community, before you knew it 45 minutes had just flown by.

Then he talked about this council endeavours over the last year to create policies and procedures. I have heard this so many times now that even I am actually starting to believe that previous councils had no policies or procedures in place. Well I have news for you surprisingly we did, were some of them in need of improvement? Absolutely, were there issues that lacked policy? of course. I thank this council for filling those needs and creating policy where there was none. Do I think future councils will think that some of their policies need improving and feel that there are areas lacking of course I do.

Then you felt the aura of excitement in the room when the Mayor stated that he was going to address the big three. Crowsnest Centre site, River Run and Highway 3.

Crowsnest Centre site: the building is in terrible shape, its not feasible for the municipality to do anything there. Council realizes the best opportunity for that site is to pursue commercial possibilities, a hotel. In fact they spent $5000 on a consultant to tell them this and to do all the research to show why this site makes sense. Wow I was blown away to hear the Mayor say everything about the Crowsnest Centre site that the majority of council was preaching over the last three years.

Then the River Run site, to my amazement he stated that this site is involved in a legal process between the various affected parties that could take years to resolve until those parties are finished with the courts. It’s private property there is nothing you can do. More shocking news.

Then we still had Highway 3, drum roll please, couple of deep breaths before the big news. The province is going ahead with the route that they have had gazetted since 1972 crossing over to the south of the valley by the west end of Blairmore heading east and south of bush town and coming out back on the west side of Coleman around the Devon plant. Timing somewhere in the next 20-25 years wow I was shocked the same story we got on the last two councils I sat on. Somebody asked the question about controlling the flow of traffic through the Pass to which the Mayor stated they have had discussions with the department of transport and they were looking at some locations for traffic lights and passing lanes, which made it through the planning stage but got shut down at budget. Strangely the same thing transport told the previous council for at least two years prior to this.

To be continued.......

Municipal Lots in the Crowsnest Pass:

2011-11-04T13:00:00.000-07:00

On September 6, 2011 Councilor Mitchell made the following motion which was passed unanimously by council.

M#6248 -11:
Councillor L. Mitchell moved to authorize Administration to reduce the price of
the listed Municipal residential lots by 10% as of September 6, 2011 and remove
the two year building commitment requirement from any future sale of municipal
residential lots.

First impression of this, is it’s not a big deal.

Let me raise the concerns I struggled with on previous council:

Should the municipality be selling lots in competition with the private sector especially in a era where the real estate market is not exactly booming?

The municipality only possesses a relatively small amount of residential lots. Why not sell them in a strong market when you can realize the maximum value for the taxpayers assets?

The argument was made by the proponents of this initiative that if the municipality sold these lots with a requirement that the purchaser must build within two years. A condition that private developers did not require, the municipality would potentially create some much needed tax base.

Well with this motion there is no pressure on a purchaser to build any time soon how many times have we seen lots sit vacant year after year in the Crowsnest Pass.

Maybe that legal requirement is not enforceable, if that's the case don’t give the lots away save them for better times.

What’s going to happen when the assessments come out next June? if I owned a vacant lot in the Pass and it was assessed for more than $70,000 I would be appealing that based on the bench mark price set by the Municipality itself.

Something to think about.

New CAO announced in the Crowsnest Pass

2011-11-01T21:49:00.000-07:00

Tonight prior to the start of the Council Meeting Mayor Decoux announced that Myron Thompson Director of Public Works accepted the position of CAO.

More to follow.

Great Expectations in the Crowsnest Pass-Reality or Smoke and Mirrors

2011-10-28T10:49:00.000-07:00

On November 9th at the Elks hall the Mayor will be presenting the strategic plan that will hopefully deal with and resolve the issues that were raised by the Mayor's Taskforce back in May.

I feel from reading the Mayor's report numerous times and based on the comments that I receive from people around town the highest profile issues are the following: The Economy, Tourism, Highway 3, Crowsnest Centre Site, Bridgegate River Run property and Residential Attraction and Retention.
To refresh every body's memories I will include what the Mayor's report had to say on each of these issues. Including the Action, Comments, Timeline, Cost and Source of Funds, and finally the measurement. What you will see below are direct quotes from the Task Force Report.

The Economy:

Action
Adopt a community economic development model:
Disband the current Crowsnest Advisory Committee.
Establish a Community Economic Development Advisory Committee. This committee, established by Council, will advise Council and the EDO and will participate actively in oversight, planning and delivery of results. Council should select members for the Committee through a request for expressions of interest and submission of qualifications. One member of the Committee should be a member of Council. All other members should be chosen based on merit and diversity, resulting in a committee that is representative of the community, including youth and seniors representation.
Hire an Economic Development Officer (EDO) on contract until such time as this position can be added to the Municipal budget.
Establish a budget for administrative support within the budget for the EDO’s office.

Comments
The Community Economic Development Advisory Committee is an essential advisory body to work with Council and the EDO to maintain a strategic and effective focus on economic development and bring the voice of the community to these important initiatives.
Hiring an EDO is seen as a top priority in order to implement this Plan and change the direction of the economic future for the community

Timeline
June-Sept 2011

Cost and Source of Funds
S80,000 per year for EDO salary from Municipal budget

Measurement
Both in place by the end of Q3 2011

Tourism

Action
Establish a full-time Tourism Coordinator Position and implement the approved Visitor Friendly Tourism Development Plan.

Comments
Community Futures will establish a full-time Tourism Coordinator position. This individual will be responsible for supporting tourism initiatives and will work with the Travel Alberta, the DMO, tourism organizations and operators to achieve tourism growth objectives.

Timeline
Sept – Nov 2011 and ongoing

Cost and source of Funds
Community Futures budget for Tourism Coordinator

Measurement
Tourism Coordinator place by Q4 2011

Highway 3

Action
Achieve agreement with the Government of Alberta on the location and timing of the realignment of Highway 3.

Comments
The uncertainty around this is a significant barrier to economic development in Crowsnest Pass and clarity will enable commitments from developers on major initiatives. The recent Alberta Competitiveness Council Report, “Moving Alberta Forward”,16 stated the need to increase the province’s ability to supply the Port of Vancouver and improvements to Highway 3 would be a significant contributor to this strategy.

Timeline
June-November 2011

Cost and Source of Funds
None

Measurement
Formal statement on plans for Highway 3

Crowsnest Centre Site

Action
Demolish and remediate the former Crowsnest Centre site and issue an RFP to developers for proposals to redevelop the site.

Comments
This site represents a significant opportunity for economic development in the community which must be capitalized on without further delay.

Timeline
June – Nov 2011

Cost and Source of Funds
Unknown

Measurement
New vision for development by Q4 2011

Bridgegate River Run Property

Action
Investigate opportunities to re-appropriate the former Bridgegate River Run property and actively pursue proposals for redevelopment.

Comments
This site also represents a significant opportunity for economic development which must be capitalized on without further delay.

Timeline
Sept 2011 – Dec 2011

Cost and Source of Funds
Unknown

Measurement
New vision for development by end of Q4 2011

Residential Attraction and Retention

Action
Develop relationship with Human Resources at Teck and Devon to understand how Crowsnest Pass could assist them in their recruitment and retention processes and attract new residents to Crowsnest Pass:
Work with Teck to identify ways to support their current expansion process.
Identify long-term opportunities for ongoing attraction of employees to the organizations and to Crowsnest Pass, including affordable housing.

Comments
Teck and Devon are important partners in the Crowsnest Pass economic future and the relationship with these organizations must be mutually beneficial.

Timeline
May – June 2011

Cost and Source of Funds
No Cost

Measurement
Successful attraction of expanded workforce to Teck and Crowsnest Pass

Do you agree with these being the issues, should there be others. What do you feel should be done, and what are your expectations, wishes or hopes for resolution of these issues.
Do you think will are going to see timely achievable resolutions to the problems listed or will it be smoke and mirrors?

G + P Meeting October 25, 2011

2011-10-27T13:09:00.000-07:00

Adoption of Agenda:

CAO deleted item (b) under delegations, added item (c) Special Council Meeting under Topics for discussion, also added a Legal issue under In Camera.

Motion to accept agenda with additions passed unanimously

Delegations:

1. Kevin Phillips, Phillips Partners Inc-Electrical Distribution Overview. The municipality owns roughly half the electrical distribution system within the Crowsnest Pass. Phillips Partners is a private company that assists the municipality in the planning, operations and purchasing of power for that system.

2. Corey Froese-2000 Frank Slide Hazard Assessment-The CAO requested that this be deferred to a G+P meeting in November.

Topics for Discussion:

1. Amendment to Municipal Government Act Re: Advertising.-Administration brought forth a resolution to encourage the provincial government to allow municipals the option to advertise on their web sites, or social media sites instead of in a local newspaper by amending the MGA.

2. Manager of Operational Services-Position award- Administration informed all present that Robert Schultz former operations Manager for the Town of Innisfail would be starting in this position October 31,2011.

3. CAO requested that a Special Council meeting take place at 1pm on Thursday October 27, 2011 to deal with a personnel issue In Camera.

In Camera: Motion to go In Camera passed unanimously.

Council Meeting of October 18, 2011 Crowsnest Pass

2011-10-20T12:11:00.000-07:00

Municipality of Crowsnest Pass

Oct 18,2011

Organizational meeting:

Committee Appointments: The only change made during this process was Councilor Mitchell took a position on the Ag Services Board then in turn Councilor Saindon took Mitchell’s place on the Municipal Bargaining Committee.

(The significance of this will be revealed in the next few months as the collective agreement with CUPE expires December 31st)

Motion to accept passed unanimously.

Deputy Mayor: Councilors Gallant and Londsbury agreed to switch positions in the rotation.

Motion to accept passed unanimously.

Meeting adjourned at 7:07pm

Council Meeting of October 18, 2011

Public Hearing: None

Adoption of Agenda: Acting CAO Myron Thompson added a personnel item under In Camera. Also requested Council to defer Item B under other Business to a later date. Motion to accept the Agenda as amended was passed unanimously

Adoption of previous minutes:
Minutes of the Council Meeting of Oct 4, 2011, with a minor correction. Motion to accept was passed unanimously

Delegations: None

Administrative and Agency Reports:
1. Kim Lutz-Appointments to the Agricultural Services Board Council passed a motion to accept Kim Lutz’s recommendations for the Board unanimously.

2. Enmax Contract- Motion to accept passed unanimously.

3. Request to lease road allowance-This involves a garage that as been sitting on municipal property since the late 1970’s on 18ave in Coleman. Motion was made by Councilor Mitchell to have the owner remove the garage at their expense by April 31st 2012. Motion to accept was passed by a vote of 5-2 (Saindon and Gallant opposed)

Business arising from the Minutes: None

Correspondence:
1. Royal Canadian Legion Coleman branch. Looking for council member to attend Remembrance day services.

2. Municipal Heritage Board request for funding. They requested the municipality pay for the costs of accommodation and travel to attend a conference. Council informed administration that there was no money in the budget for these types of requests. Motion to deny the request was passed unanimously.

Committee Reports:

1. Minutes of August 23, 2011 G+P committee meeting, no discussion. Motion to accept passed unanimously.
2. Minutes of September 13, 2011 G+P committee meeting, no discussion. Motion to accept passed unanimously
3. Minutes of August 31, 2011 Subdivision and Development Board. Question raised regarding a retaining wall built in Bellevue, CAO Thompson told council the wall must be removed by the end of the month or legal action will begin. Motion to accept passed unanimously

Bylaws:
1. Bylaw 834, 2011- Regulated Rate Tariff (all 3 reading). Motion passed first reading unanimously, second reading passed unanimously, consideration for third reading passed unanimously, third reading passed 5-2 (Saindon and Saje opposed)
2. Bylaw 835, 2011 –Default Supplier Tariff. (all 3 reading). Motion passed first reading unanimously, second reading passed unanimously, consideration for third reading passed unanimously, third reading passed 5-2 (Saindon and Saje opposed)

Note: Several councilors complained about being forced by administration to vote on all three readings of the bylaws above. They did not have to, unlike most issues presented at council that require a majority of council to support them before they take effect. Bylaws can only be given all three reading at one meeting only if after second reading all members of council vote in favor of allowing third reading to take place any one councilor could have forced this issue to be readdressed at the next council meeting.

Notices of Motion: None

Other Business:
1. Municipal Heritage Board Appointments/Advertising for new members. Council appointed John Kinnear by unanimous vote to sit on this board to represent the Ecomuseum board. No motion made to advertise the other vacant position.

2. Property Tax Bylaw 821,2011 deferred to a later meeting.

Council Member reports: Some councilors listed of meetings they attended.

Public Input: None

Motion to go In Camera: Passed Unanimously

Fire Departments create much debate in the Crowsnest Pass

2011-10-17T10:50:00.000-07:00

Since the announcement in late September there as been a tremendous amount of debate about the changes within the fire departments in the Crowsnest pass.

First of all I feel not enough as been shared with the community, for years here there has been much discussion over the need for four fire departments. Were they all necessary could we get by with three, two, one who knows.

The arguments in favour of four departments given to me were due to the size of the community, and the fact that a lot of volunteers work shift work at the mines it was necessary to have the coverage we do.

The arguments against four departments were the cost of both operating them and the capital costs four fire trucks etc etc.

The two issues that I have heard come up again and again in the last three weeks are the issues of costs and volunteer coverage.

First of all costs, even from the people who felt that we did not need four fire halls, the question as been asked over and over again how does this plan save money. In my time on council the cost of running four fire departments was around $350,000 a year with each department costing anywhere from $75-100,000.
So the question being asked of me is where will the municipality save any money even if you close one, two fire halls. By hiring a full time fire chief, an assistant fire chief, increasing the honorariums and paying an higher rate of pay, this change will increase costs.

The second issue that keeps getting raised is the issue of coverage the new plan calls for ten people to be on call in the community night and day 365 days per year. Is that possible using only volunteers most of whom work a shift schedule. With eighty firemen maybe, how long is that number going to stay at eighty? Acting CAO Robins stated in the Promoter a couple of issues back that they fully expect that number to drop over time, he also stated that this community has about three times the number of firemen for a community of our size.

We have not heard the last of this issue, time will tell both how the new structure works and how cost effective it is. I truly hope the community doesn't receive a lessor service by creating a larger bureaucracy.

This is truly a decisive issue look at the polls on this blog 39% of the voters approve the restructuring 60% don't. The Promoter is at an even higher number opposed 67% and the Herald is pretty well spilt at 50/50.

Lies and truths in the Crowsnest Pass

2011-10-12T08:53:00.000-07:00

Issue of advertisng: Very interested to read the editiorial in the Pass Herald this week I will quote "For example, stating that it was costing taxpayers in the Crowsnest Pass $50,000 a year for advertising is a blatant lie"

Well folks lets set the record straight first of all the issue of advertising was on the G+P meeting agenda last night which was discussed by council for almost a half hour. Within that discussion is was pointed out by administration that the sum of between $6-700,000 as been spent in the last seven years on advertising. I have trouble with my math but that comes out to close to $100,000 per year.

Second of all I would like to point out the following: http://www.town.crowsnestpass.ab.ca/council go to November 2, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes on page 2 is a report on Ms Lisa Syguteks presentation to council regarding advertising it states the following regarding 2008 advertising costs (remember it was tendered out for 2009 and 2010).

2008 advertising in the Crowsnest Pass Herald – approximately $30,000
2008 advertising in the competitor– approximately $35,000

For those of you that don't know Ms Sygutek is the publisher of the Pass Herald. If anybody requires further information I have the numbers for at least two years prior to 2008 just have to spend a little time digging them up.

But you don't have to take my word for it check with the municipality $700,000 for the last seven years and check the minutes from Nov 2,2010

More to follow:

Always intrigued me to watch a politician attempt to play both sides of an issue, the MGA does not require municipalities to advertise everything they do, the legal requirement calls for just a few issues to be advertised.
So last night within the debate about advertsing administration states that $6-700,000 as been spent in the last seven years. One of the councilors asks the question what would that number have been if we had only advertised what we were legally required to. Administration states that it would have been approximatly a $100,000.
Then Councilor Gallant speaks up he states the following "You know I supported us advertising in both papers it was important to communicate with the public to get our message out, but I also believe that we should only be advertising what the MGA requires us to do"
Well you can't have it both ways the CAO as just told you that if the municipality had advertised what it was legally required to do the advertising would have been cut by 85%. But on the other hand you stated it was important to advertise in both papers to communicate with the public!

Fire Departments/Rescue Meet with Administration

2011-09-29T19:08:00.000-07:00

Big meeting Thursday night at the Elks Hall between, Administration, Fire departments and Rescue.

The press release is available on the municipal web site regarding Emergency and Protective Services.

Note: Another chance to voice your opinion on this issue http://www.crowsnestpasspromoter.com/

Here is the way it was explained to myself.

There will be a Director of Protective and Community Services hired, basically a replacement for the former Director (Cam Mertz) probably cost the community a little more money due to the expanded duties of the position.

Under that position will be a Manager of Protective Services/Fire Chief I am told that this will be another new full time position. (You are not going to fill this position for less than $80,000 a year, plus a pickup, computer, clerical support etc etc.)

Under that will be a Deputy Chief which I am told will still be a volunteer position.

Then from there the municipality will be broken into two areas West (Coleman + Blairmore) and East (Hillcrest + Bellevue) each will have a District Chief. So the four positions that used to be fire chiefs will now be replaced with a West and East District Chief.

Then there will be a rotation put in place (Emergency Response Model Deployment) which will for example in the West have Coleman providing coverage for week 1 and 3 each month and Blairmore providing coverage in week 2 and 4 each month.

Once again the way it was explained to be is each squad will have a minimum of five people on call during its turn in the rotation.

My opinion of where this is going. The Fire Departments have always been a very hot potato here politically. I was told a long time ago that the politician that stood up and demanded fire departments to be closed would be committing political suicide.

So how do you achieve that goal with out a huge back lash. First of all you bring in a consultant to look at your protective services. (Politicians love consultants, they have somebody to blame for their actions other than themselves).

Then you come out with a recommendation that says you could better serve the municipality by having two areas of coverage instead of the present four. In reality, you will only have one fire department in each area at any given time because in the East for example Hillcrest will provide coverage in week 1 + 3 and Bellevue in week 2 + 4.

Any of us that have been privy to the numbers will tell you that there are very few fires in the East end of the community, in a year the argument will be made that the East as been provided ample coverage with one department. Due to the fact that there were very few incidents and you have only one fire department covering you at any one time. Nobody will speak up in the west because their departments will not be touched at that time.

In essence the fire departments will do such a good job of providing coverage that they themselves will prove that you can get away with one department on each side of the municipality. Even our former Mayor stated in a strategic planning meeting that some where down the road there would only be two fire departments one on each side of the slide.

I hope that the municipality will maintain the fire coverage it requires, I also hope that there is going to be long term sustainable funding found to pay for another new position.

The price of silence.

2011-09-27T11:01:00.000-07:00

Now taxpayers of the Crowsnest Pass is the time to speak up.

It’s a very simple process. Speak and you may be heard, say nothing and you definitely will not.

Right now as you are reading this post, administration is gathering information from its various departments, from the various groups that are subsidized by your tax dollars.

Administration is taking that information to prepare a three year budget, that’s right a three year budget another change. We could debate all day long the merits of longer term budgeting, but in my opinion the greater concern with a budget of that length is the opportunity for input is taken away.

The one the most important area that politicians try to avoid input from is you the taxpayers, there is nothing more politicians love than “Silence” they will tell you different, they may well offer you opportunities such as open houses, surveys, etc. Deep down what they really long for is “Silence”. Especially with a three year budget, get through this process there will be eighteen months to the next election, by then everybody will have settled down and they won’t have to worry about this issue one year into the next term.

One of the advantages of an annual budget is that by the time the last one is passed by a council, the bills are received by the taxpayers its only four months to the next election. The whole process is fresh on the mind of taxpayers, the issues, the debates, the justifications for councils actions, politicians don’t want you to have a fresh recollections of that process.

This is a small community in my six years I watched councilors flip flop on issues because special interest groups put pressure on them. The most important group of all needs to speak up you the taxpayers.

How do you do that? these members of council live in this community most people know them, tell them how you feel, call them their phone numbers are available at the municipal office 403-562- 8833. Write letters to the editor, vote on surveys right now the Pass Herald is asking for opinions on the Franchise fee increases. http://www.passherald.ca/

Why the fear now? Just last week Council approved increases in Franchise Fees during that debate the acting CAO referred to a need to bring in an additional $550,000 next year (the equivalent of an 8% tax increase) to satisfy the goals and objectives of councils strategic plan.

I understand many people in this community are desperate for change. The strategic plan is going to be the tool used to drive the need for additional taxes. What ever became of doing more by becoming more efficient? On October 13,2010 Councilor Saindon stated the following “My many years of experience in operations within large corporations reveals to me that we have a huge opportunity to take these cost reductions and use them to keep our tax increases at or near 0%”.

The Crowsnest Pass according to the 2006 census is the oldest community in the province our average age is almost 50, we have the largest percentage of seniors living on a fixed income in the province. Who can afford an 8% increase?

If this or any other council wishes to get creative and do new and wonderful things then they need to get creative and find ways to do more with the same, find those cost reductions Councilor Saindon referred to.

This issue makes me think about Councilor Gallants vision, his platform I quote “As a councilor, I will not vote for any increase to property taxes for any reason - period! It is time to take a hard look at the services we have and the way business is conducted by the municipality. We must set realistic boundaries and be firm about not crossing them. There is money out there, we just have to stop wasting what we have and start tapping into sources we have ignored. As a businessman, I believe very strongly in efficiency. When I discover that my business is doing something that is unnecessarily costing us money, I do not wait a year or two to start investigating it - I put the people or plans in place to solve it right away. The municipal council needs to have that same commitment and drive; it is our duty to the taxpayers of our town. Once we have learned to be more diligent, we should then go further and reduce our property taxes”

Only one year later administration is talking about tax increases? contact your councilors remind them what they said a year ago. Tell them how you really feel about tax increases remind them that their first budget we were going to see zero increases and it really ended up being 2%.

Speak up now let the members of council hear where you sit before they pass a three year budget not after. Take a moment read the list down the right hand side and decide is this the change you are willing to pay more and more for. Pick a cost reduction that as saved the municipality one dollar from that list.

Is the last sentence of Councilor Gallant's quote in the Strategic Plan “Once we have learned to be more diligent, we should then go further and reduce our property taxes”

I and a lot of other people in the Pass sure hope so.

Remember more than anything “Silence” will cost you.

Change its Coming, Franchise Fees, Taxes

2011-09-21T08:55:00.000-07:00

Breaking News:

Well the public demanded change and by jolly Jan 1st Council is going to give it to you.

Yes you will defininitly see change, on your power and gas bill.

The CAO stated last night to achieve the goals and objectives of Council strategic plan the municipality needs to bring in an additional $500,000 in revenue next year, you can achieve that by raising franchise fees, mill rate etc. He went on further to state that if they didn't do franchise fees it would equate to an 8% tax increase.

My doesn't change feel good.

The initial motion by Councilor Mitchell was to keep the Atco charge at the present rate of 15%, and to increase the Fortis rate from 8% to 14% (within the ensuing debate he suggested that it could go to 17% next year). Then Councilor Londsbury made a friendly amendment to increase the Atco rate to 20% which was accepted by Councilor Mitchell. The motion passed by a vote of 5-2 (Saindon, Gail opposed)

What does this mean to you the taxpayer?
Fortis (electricity bill) will increase by $32.64 a year and bring in for the municipality an additional $147,823 a year.
Atco (Gas bill) will increase by $22.32 a year and bring in for the municipality an additional $47,638 per year. That's a total of an additional $195,461 per year coming out of the taxpayers pocket.
Still leaves the municipality looking for an additional $350,000 in revenue to stasify the goals of the forth coming strategic plan.

NOTE: You can vote at the Pass Herald on how you feel about these franchise fee increases @ http://www.passherald.ca/index.htm

Latest Poll Results "Transparency your opinion"

2011-09-20T10:26:00.000-07:00

The latest question was:

Do you feel that the municipalities business is being conducted in a transparent manner?

Out of 39 votes 29 or 74% said no. 10 votes or 26% said yes.
Take it for what its worth, but that's a fairly one sided vote.

My next question involves the relationship between this council and the media, thinking back to my last term on council, I certainly felt that the last council was followed much closely scrutinized than this council by the media. I feel that some parts of the media were very biased to some of the previous council. In almost a year I have not read one negative comment, article or editorial about this council.

Maybe these guys are doing everything right? Any way it will be interesting to see if how my readers agree or not.

More Taxes? Maybe just in a different format.

2011-09-14T11:34:00.000-07:00

Last week at the council meeting there was a motion made by Councilor Saje to approve a recommendation from administration to conduct a Facility Audit/Needs Assessment at a cost of up to $90,000.

The motion was passed by a vote of 5-2, (councilors Mitchell and Londsbury opposed). No question this process needs to take place some of our building are in bad shape, there were questions raised by various councilors regarding facilities that were not on the original list, fire halls, seniors facilities etc. To my surprise knowing the positions that some of the councilors previously took nobody raised the Crowsnest Centre.

The big question in my mind is how was this going to be paid for? Administration is recommending that the dollars be taken out of the MSI funding that the municipality receives every year from the provincial government. This is a reasonable approach except it now creates a hole somewhere else. That money has been received by the municipality for quite a few years it’s always been spent, now some where down the line there will be a $90,000 shortfall.

But the optimistic side of my brain says that’s no problem there will surely be saved $90,000 some where in the operation by finding more efficiency improvements that were so often spoke about in the last year this hope did not last long.

Last night I attended the G+P meeting to my surprise during a discussion about organizational responses to public correspondence/calls. The acting CAO made the comment that administration could well be looking at 1-2 more clerical positions for the office. Obviously, no improved efficiency savings in that part of the operation, keep in mind that every person added to the municipality adds another $50-60 thousand per year.

Going back to my original comment where are they going to find additional revenues.

To very little surprise item #5 under topics for discussion is Franchise fees, what has become a great revenue generator for municipalities over the years and allows politicians the opportunity to claim they did not raise your property taxes, very similar to municipal water/sewer/garbage bills.

Right now on your utility bills you will see a line item marked Municipal Franchise fee between the various companies it brings in $360,000 a year, council will be reviewing these rates in the very near future.

On behalf of the over taxed residents of this community I surely hope that all these studies, audits, task forces are going to be paid for by dollars saved in improved efficiencies not by increases in taxes (property, utilities, franchise fees, user fees etc).

Crowsnest Pass Public Transit Survey

2011-09-12T09:25:00.000-07:00

In the last few days you should have received your utility bill, included with it is a survey on public transit.

For more information on public transportation and the costs associated with it take a look at the following post: http://crowsnestpasshome.blogspot.com/2011/05/public-transportation-in-crowsnest-pass.html

I know most people take those surveys and throw them in the garbage typically out of 3500 surveys mailed out the municipality will be lucky if they get 200 back which represents less than 6% of the population.
The problem with that of course is that all politicians have an agenda, things that they would like to see happen over the course of their term.
For example these surveys are usually filled out by people that passionately care about the issue at hand.
So I expect that the vast majority of the surveys the municipality receives will support public transit.

How will the politicians react? well those that are against spending $300,000 a year of taxpayers money will argue that the response represents such a small percentage of the taxpayers that its recommendations are irrelevant.
The politicians that support spending $300,000 a year of taxpayers money will argue that the over whelming response of the public was in support of this. Obviously the 90% that did not respond would have if they really cared about this issue.

The bottom line here is which ever side of this issue you stand on if you do not respond a very small percentage of the voters will have a much larger say in how this issue is decided.

Note:

I noticed the absence of one key question on the survey "Would you be willing to have your taxes increase to provide a public transit system?"

Crowsnest Centre Lands-Development Feasibility Study

2011-09-10T10:41:00.000-07:00

Administration brought forth a recommendation to spend $4000 to use Rich Eichler Consulting Ltd to conduct a feasibility study to identify development opportunities for this site.
I was anticipating a large fight over this proposal, when previous council rezoned that land to commercial Councilor Mitchell was furious, in fact Councilor Taje had proposed to put aside that land for future municipal use and Councilor Mitchell strongly supported that position.
So I expected that strong voice to lead the opposition to this proposal, I also expected some members of this council to spearhead the drive to invest into and reopen the centre. All I heard for the last couple of years from those individuals was what a great place it was and all it gave to this community and how critical it was to keep it going.
(Remember the editorials Crowsnest Pass will lose the education consortium if this place closed)
But then again based on their actions most of our elected officials have realised that the municipality could not even afford to operate a library in Bellevue let alone a 30,000 square foot decrepit building that the Alberta government determined to be unsuitable has a hospital 35 years ago.

Any way maybe I'm of base here and the recommendation of this study will be to use the site for future municipal use.

Transparency the promise every politician makes but seldom keeps.

2011-09-09T14:00:00.000-07:00

Remember a long, long time ago when a group of people sat in a public forum talking about change and Transparency? Last October to be exact down at the Elks Hall in what some people are now referring to has Crowsnest West (Blairmore for those that don’t want to change everything).

On August 22th I posted the following update on some council business that had transpired on August 16th. “Is this the way business should be conducted?” available at the following address. http://crowsnestpasshome.blogspot.com/2011/08/is-this-way-business-should-be.html

Personally I did not agree with the way this issue was dealt with and neither did a lot of other people I spoke to around town. But never the less at least Council and administration at that time felt the right thing to do was to show the public that they were moving forward on this issue and hiring a consultant to conduct the audit. (TRANSPARENCY)

Now we come to the meeting of September 5, 2011 his worship the Mayor and the council are reviewing the minutes of the August 16th meeting. The Mayor raises the issue of the “Enforcement Services Audit” that was brought to Council by the Director of Finance. Strangely he wants to know why this issue was raised by administration, that there was not a need to. Apparently based on the comments I heard Tuesday night when the contract was signed with “Transitional Systems Inc” to provide the Municipality with its Interim CAO, it was stated that their employees, agents etc could be used for other studies, audits etc as required by Council.

With time to reflect on this issue, the following questions jumped into my head.

First why did nobody raise a concern or objection on August 16th, none of the parties to the agreement not the CAO or any member of Council, in fact the individual who now raised these concerns on September 5th was the same individual that made the motion on August 16 to “engage Transitional Systems Inc. to undertake an Enforcement Services Audit…….” When the vote took place it was passed by a count of 6-1 with only Councilor Saje opposed.

Second concern based on my understanding of the Mayor’s comments are we to believe that the agreement they have with Transitional Systems provides council the authority to do any study, audit etc as they see fit without bringing it back for a vote at a council meeting. This only creates an issue in the sense that the business of council should be conducted in public, at least providing the public the opportunity to attend the meeting and hear the information themselves if they choose to attend. At minimum allow the press to report on the information for the public to consume when they read their local paper. (Transparency)

Third will the public ever be made aware of what’s in this contract with Transitional Systems Inc. What other work can be handed to them without it being discussed in the public forum, what kind of taxpayers dollars are being spent (Yes they will be substantial).

The cynical part of my brain says based on the lack of comments and concerns about the issue on August 16 that if I had not raised it on my blog and made the public aware of it that it would have never been mentioned at the meeting of Sept 5th. But maybe I'm wrong.

Breaking News in the Crowsnest Pass-More change

2011-09-01T12:41:00.000-07:00

Director of Community Services Cam Mertz is no longer employed with the Municipality.

First in June the CAO Tully Clifford left the municpality.

Then in July Director of HR and Legislative Services Lynne Cox left the municipality.

Now the Director of Community Services.

Interesting Poll results, New CAO when?

2011-08-29T12:26:00.000-07:00

I asked the following question:

Should the municipality spend the additional tax dollars to send all members of council to conventions?

Not surprisingly out of 39 people that took a moment to vote a solid 76% agreed with the arguments presented on my previous post regarding the issue of the Convention attendance policy.
While there is no question that there is "some" value to sending some members of council to these events there is no question that the odd meeting can be set up with the right people, also no question that some of the education sessions are of value. But it does not take 8-9 people to take notes in a education session or pick up relevant literature and it does not take 8-9 voices to represent the municipalities interests in those meetings. Has a former Mayor told me at my first convention they are a nice perk for councils and CAO's but not at a cost of $30,000 per year!

My next poll is regarding the search for a CAO, last year when we went through the debate about hiring a new CAO, the minority on council were adamant that it should have been left for the next council to fill the position, I and some of my fellow councilors disagreed stating that there would not be enough time for a new council to be placed in office and find a CAO in time to deal with the budget process 2 months. Of course the minority of council felt that was an ample time.

Based on that debate and considering the last CAO gave his notice on May 19th, pleased take a moment to address my new poll which asks the simple question are you surprised that a permanent CAO as not been found three and a half months after giving his notice?

Coming soon, time to pay the piper

2011-08-25T12:35:00.000-07:00

Last week at the council meeting the head of finance was giving the council an update on the financial state of the municipality to the middle of August. Within that discussion somebody pointed out that there is an almost $300,000 liability for accumulated sick time for the municipal staff, a couple of other councilors seemed unaware of this. Which surprised me in the sense that this number appears in the annual municipal financial statements every year, which council just reviewed three months ago.

For the benefit of my readers where does this come from?

Municipal employees hired after July 1 2008 receive one and a half sick days per month (prior to that it was two days per month this was changed during the bargaining process at that time). If they do not use these days they get to accumulate them up to a maximum of 120 days, which they are then paid out on a 50% basis when they retire. (For example 60 days times 8 hours @ approx $30 per hour equals $14,400 per employee). The difficulty with this benefit is that after an employee has been with the town for less than seven years the 120 days are accumulated and in some cases it becomes an additional 18 days a year off. If they do not use them they lose them, there is simply no incentive to not use them.

Now they are aware maybe this council will have some ideas to deal with this issue.

The next issue related to this and where it becomes increasing difficult to manage the municipal finances especially when the workforce is expanding is the cost of payroll. I am told that the town of Pincher Creek’s employees just turned down a three year contract with a wage increase of 3%, 2.5% and 2.75%. The Municipalities contract with CUPE is up at the end of the year, applying those same increases to the Pass would see some huge additional costs. In the 2010 financial statement (which would not cover the new positions created this year total cost of Salaries, Wages and Benefits was $4,923,486 increase those numbers by the percentages above 2012 would go to $5,071,191, 2013 $5,197,970, and 2014 $5,340,915.

That’s an additional $839,618 over the next three years or to put it in very simple terms it would take an average increase of 2.4% in taxes each year to accommodate those additional costs. Several factors that will come in to play here; the impact of the new positions created this year, maybe Cupe will be willing to accept less in this round of bargaining than they would in Pincher and surrounding areas. Or the workforce through gains in efficiencies will shrink enough to offset any additional wage increases.

Just some things to think about especially if there is further consideration to increase the municipal workforce.

Is this the way business should be conducted?

2011-08-22T12:02:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday August 16, an item titled “Enforcement Services Audit” appeared on the agenda, with a recommendation coming forth from Administration stating the following.

“That council direct administration to engage Transitional Solutions Inc. to undertake an Enforcement Services Audit to examine the existing Municipal enforcement practices in reference to the enforcement of Provincial statutes and Municipal Bylaws. The Audit is not to exceed $7,000 and will be assumed within the Municipal Enforcement Budget.

The argument was made by the Interim CAO Kevin Robins about concerns in this area that required clarification. Administration also stated that the Municipality did not have the expertise internally to conduct this audit.

This recommendation was voted on by Council, which subsequently passed by a vote of 6-1 with only Councilor Saje opposed.

What appears at first impression has just another study to clear up an area of confusion and answer questions raised by council and the residents of the community due to frustrations in the area of the Municipality’s enforcement program.

Upon further study this recommendation raises other questions? the Interim CAO who is also the CEO of the Transitional Solutions is recommending that the municipality conduct an audit on our Enforcement Services using an outside contractor that just happens to be “Transitional Solutions”.

I know its only $7,000 but no tendering process no opportunity for any other company to take a look at this?????
Does anybody else have concerns regarding even the perception of a conflict of interest?

“Convention policy receives thrashing”

2011-08-12T12:04:00.000-07:00

This was the title of an article posted in the local paper a few weeks back, available at the address below.

http://www.crowsnestpasspromoter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?archive=true&e=3233128

Previous council put in place a policy that no more than three members of council could attend conventions at any one time, with each councilor being allowed to attend at least once during their term. The municipality belongs to three organizations that hold conventions every year the FCM, AUMA, and the AAMDC.

Mayor Decoux in a very strong tone referred to this as “an archaic defeatist type of policy” the acting CAO addressed the importance of the AUMA convention, with it being an excellent opportunity for council to network with peers in other municipalities, to attend valuable education sessions, to deal with the business of the association and their resolutions. He also mentioned that they would be trying to line up meetings with various provincial ministers.

Sounds good in theory?

When I was first elected to council in 2004 I went to a couple of conventions, in both Edmonton and Calgary. I find out going through my first budget process that $30-40,000 of the taxpayers money was being spent a year attending these conventions. Nothing to sneeze at but with an open mind I felt maybe it was money well spent. Let’s look at the different aspects of these conventions:

Meeting peers from other municipalities, true no question about it you get to meet a lot of people, keep in mind council attends regional meetings on an annual basis where they get to meet all of their fellow councilors from both this corner of the province and the Elk Valley municipalities with issues similar to ours. Outside of the immediate area how many municipalities really care about what’s going on in the Crowsnest Pass they have their own issues to deal with.

There also is the opportunity to find out what other municipalities are doing, let’s keep in mind that with the invention of the Internet you can find out what anybody is doing in the few strokes of the keyboard. If you really want to be “archaic” you could pick up the phone and call other communties.

Valuable education sessions, some are really good some are like watching paint dry, the one’s that are good, lots of people attend and the others very few attend. Most of the sessions provide literature which a councilor could bring back and copy for his fellow councilors. Also we asked that councilors bring back a report on the valuable information they heard, and share it with all of council. No different than went you send a councilor to the Oldman watershed committee, or any other meeting you don’t send all of them you ask for a report back.

Business of the association, there are 3000 people in a big room voting on resolutions that for the most part are decided by substantial margins one way or the other, the fact that Crowsnest Pass as three votes or seven does it really matter?

Meetings with ministers, two types first of all you have a session with ministers where they answer questions from the room then they go out on the floor to speak to the delegates. Its really builds your ego up when a politician looks at your name tag and says “Dean good to see you again, I hear things are going really well in Canmore! Oops sorry Crowsnest Pass” I sat and counted one time a minister speak to 25 delegates in thirty minutes, I questioned how many of there comments he would remember two days from now.

Second there are the scheduled meetings with ministers in a private room, you get 20-30 minutes to meet with a minister and his assistant. Most councils have a spokesmen either the Mayor or the CAO who will do 90% of the speaking for your group lets be realistic you are not going to have eight people yapping of in a short meeting with a minister. Do you really need all seven members of council there?

A few things that were missed by the Mayor and the CAO:

Hospitality rooms. these are meeting rooms in various hotels where delegates are staying. Set up by vendors that deal with municipalities: engineering firms, law firms, and suppliers. You get to go eat free food and all the booze you can drink, certainly saw a lot more enthusiastic councilors in these rooms than I did at the education sessions. These are the types of people that municipal administrators should be dealing with, not politicians.

Costs: $30-40,000 a year you may ask how can that be. Well remember each member of council gets a $160 per day times 7 that’s $1120 per day times at minimum 4 days per convention. Hotel rooms are going to cost at least $200 per day times 8 (Including CAO) that’s $1600 per day. Mileage most councilors take their spouse which means you will have a minimum of 4 people charging mileage $2000 to Edmonton.

Keep in mind the FCM is usually held outside Alberta in places like Quebec City, Whistler, Halifax etc. Even more costly when you factor in plane fares.

Stephen Mandel Mayor of Edmonton did not attend this year he stated “the FCM group hasn't been effective in pushing civic concerns in Ottawa”

Back to the issues are there a value to these conventions?

I believe there is some, there is no question that occasionally some good information is picked up, and some of the right hands are shaken. But nothing that one or two individuals couldn’t share with a larger group.

Should all seven members of council attend? I don’t believe so it’s a luxury that a community with our lack of financial strength cannot afford.

When you are closing libraries and consolidating shops to be more efficient and cut costs why does every member of council need to go to a convention?

Municipal Press Release Crowsnest Pass

2011-07-20T13:55:00.000-07:00

PRESS RELEASE

Crowsnest Pass Operational Services (Public Works) is implementing
plans to improve overall efficiency and service delivery to community
residents.

These plans include numerous functional changes that will see improved
utilization of resources, improved efficiency and increased accountability.

The first step will be the consolidation of the Blairmore and Coleman shops
into one facility which will be the Blairmore Facility. This facility will now be
known as the Crowsnest West Facility, while Hillcrest facility, which also
serves Bellevue, will be known as Crowsnest East Facility.

These changes will take place over a relatively short period of time and
residents should be assured that service levels will not be reduced as a
result of these changes.

Myron Thompson
Director of Operational Services
Municipality of Crowsnest Pass

Rum Runner Days weekend.

2011-07-19T11:13:00.000-07:00

Well here is your chance to make your comments about the weekend, good bad or indifferent. Weather it be the parade, show and shine, carnival, Thunder in the Valley, etc.

What did you think, is the weekend worth the $100,000 of taxpayers money that goes in to it?

Should the weekend continue in its present form, should the municipality be taking over the entire weekend as suggested by our local leaders or just leaving it alone.

Looking forward to any and all comments, now's your chance to speak.

Economic Task Force-Rum Runner Days/Thunder in the Valley

2011-06-30T09:01:00.000-07:00

What I believe is going to be one of the most controversial recommendations in the Task Force Report is #10 regarding the whole Rum Runner/Thunder in the Valley weekend.
Below we have the Task Force recommendation and there suggestions about how to achieve it.
Some of council is already chomping at the bit to get to this issue, a few meetings back, Councilor Gail asked the CAO if they have received all the financial information from the Fire Dept yet, the previous CAO stated they were still waiting. Early in the year Mayor Decoux wanted administration to find out who owns Thunder in the Valley.
This last meeting Mayor Decoux notified a number of local residents that this year will be the last year that this weekend will be ran the way it’s always been, that next year there will be significant change. Councilor Gail this week also asked if it would not be better for the municipality to take back over the camping along the train tracks to realize that revenue for municipal coffers.

Then to top it all off Mayor Decoux stated that the real cost of this weekend for the municipality will be well in excess of $100,000.

Here is the recommendation and suggestions from the task force on how to enhance the weekend I have put a Note with my comments after each point

“10. Review and re-develop Rum Runner Days/Thunder in the Valley with a focus on increasing potential for economic benefit to the community and local businesses:”

• Establish a community committee to run Rum Runner Days/Thunder in the Valley with the support of the Tourism Coordinator. Note: This would clearly tie the two events together the arguments have always been made by the affected groups that they are two separate events.

• Develop a financial model that is transparent regarding sources and uses of funds and results in profit to the Municipality, local businesses and the event. Note: If the two events are being tied together will all parties share all financial information as requested by Councilor Gail.

• Consider payment for parking and bussing into a central location as a revenue generator and resolution for egress problems in the past. Note: Wow what a logistic nightmare, 50 people on a bus even if you forced half the crowd lets say 15000 to get on a bus that 300 bus loads where would you find them, park them and control who gets on which bus.

• Consider expanding the event to Thursday night, Friday, Saturday and Sunday afternoon. Note: great idea in theory lots of work will you find somebody willing to take on this load. There was a public request last year for help to take over the work load that Marion Vanoni as handled for year not a lot of people stepped forward.

• Add entertainment by inviting big name acts for Thursday night, Friday night Saturday night before the fireworks, and Sunday afternoon. Many of these entertainers may already be at the South Country Fair, which is the same weekend, and may be able to perform in a sponsored tent located a reasonable distance from residential areas with bussing back and forth from the designated parking. Note: who will put all the money up front to sponsor these events especially the first year, if you want big name acts you will pay big money guaranteed money. Even retro groups like Nazareth, April Wine command $12-15,000 up front money. Do we want to risk taxpayers money on the success of these types of ventures.

• Attract sponsorships including approaching Cowboys in Calgary to sponsor and manage the tent, as well as Bacardi Rum for donations of liquor, consistent with the Rum Runner theme. Identify other sponsors in addition to these examples. Note: I was involved with a beer garden once on this weekend if you are going to maintain this weekend as a family event I would like to stay away from this kind of event. In addition, easy to confirm with the RCMP the number of arrests without Beer Gardens as been way down.

• Enhance promotion through an integrated campaign building on web site, billboards, radio and social media. Note: Does this event need any more promotion I think anybody within a 300 km radius knows about the event. Also advertising is very expensive who will front those dollars in the first year.

This is going to be a very tough issue to deal with groups that have had control of different aspects are not going to relinquish them freely. There are certain parts of this weekend that are actually owned by groups, will we see a budget item this year to purchase naming rights to Thunder in the Valley. Some people want to grow the event some people want it to go away. Irregardless of what any of us think Mayor and Council seem determined to change this weekend.

G + P Meeting June 28, 2011

2011-06-29T14:00:00.000-07:00

Adoption of Agenda:

Mayor Decoux added # 9 under Topics for Discussion, Strategic Planning.
Councilor Saindon added a personnel issue In Camera.
CAO requested that Item #6 and #8 under Topics for discussion go In Camera, and that Item #7 be deferred to July 12th.
Motion to accept agenda with additions passed unanimously

Delegations:

1. Scott Warris, Treasurer-Crowsnest Pass Boy’s and Girl club. Provided and update on upcoming activities, fund raising and fiscal situation. Informed council that they are selling raffle tickets around town. That they will be doing a duck race at the centre access on July 16, running the concession at the Sinister seven event, and that the Blairmore Lions are giving them the proceeds from their up coming golf tournament. He also stated that they have raised one third of the $40,000 they anticipated but are very hope full they will reach their goals with the previously mentioned fundraisers.

2. June Vastenhout-Neighbourhood Concerns with random camping during the Rum Runner days weekend near Lyons creek. After an explanation of the issue by the residents, Mayor Decoux felt they should be addressing their concerns to the CAO and the bylaw officer.

Note: At this point Mayor Decoux informed the residents that there is not a lot of time to deal with the over all issues caused by the success of the Rum Runner Days/Thunder in the Valley weekend and the masses of people it brings for that event. However, he assured the residents that this is the last year that it will be ran in the fashion it as previously been run.

Topics for Discussion:
1. Property Tax Installment Bylaw-Language cleanup regarding the bylaw allowing residents to pay there taxes in installments.

2. Rum Runner Days/Thunder in the Valley, Administration provided an update on all the services being in place for that weekend. Mayor Decoux made the point that this weekend is costing the municipality well in excess of a $100,000. Councilor Gail also raise a concern about groups using the camping opposite the ISS as a fund raiser felt that money should be coming back to the community, allowing it to recoup its costs.

3. Orpheum Theatre Bylaw-Update on allowing this building to get an historical designation.

4. Alta Link follow up-Council had requested Alta Link’s environmental report on the proposed line upgrades in the Pass, mostly irrelevant at this point due to the line not moving above Blairmore.

5. Advertising Policy-Basically allows each department to advertise anywhere they see fit as long as the dollars are approved in its budget. Strange policy it specifies that one particular form of media will receive advertising in more than one local vendor but then instructs administration to go get the best deal they can.(?)

6. Agenda Format Changes moved to In Camera

7. Review of the Procedural Bylaws and the G+P committee deferred to July 12

8. Community Standards Bylaw enforcement moved to In Camera

9. Strategic Planning-Mayor Decoux made it clear to council that there is a lot of work to be done this summer, many meetings long hard days of preparing council’s strategic plan with a first draft ready for Sept 1. He requested that a couple of members of council get together and co-ordinate everybody’s schedule by next council meeting, Councilor Saje with the assistance of Councilor Saindon agreed to do this.

Note: Two things that took place during the meeting really surprised me, after the Cuff report recommended that we combine our committee of the whole and several other committees’ into the G+P meeting format. The previous council was clearly told by our administrator at that time that we could not pass motions at those meeting, but we could vote on weather to forward recommendations to council. This went on for at least the last year and a half of the previous council, after the election new council and new CAO carried on the same practice. Last night while dealing with Topics for Discussion the Interim CAO informed council that this practice was wrong that council can not conduct any votes at the G+P meeting, really surprising that the last two CAO’s did not know that.

The second issue that absolutely shocked me was just prior to going In Camera; the Mayor decided that he needed to share a few words with administration, with the public and media still sitting there. He started with nobody on council has legislative experience on procedures of council; he also went on about how administration needed to provide council with clear, precise complete information. That anything less than that would not be tolerated, that if council was put in the position of making decisions without all the information being 100% available and accurate that he and Council would be making recommendations to the CAO regarding those administrators.

Do I have a problem with what was said above, or even the tone that it was said in? No. Management in every organization when justified needs a good kick in the ass, the problem with what happened above is it should have been done behind closed doors. No employee should be given shit by their Boss in front of the public let alone the media.

In Camera: Motion to go In Camera passed unanimously.

Special Council meeting of June 28, 2011

2011-06-29T09:43:00.000-07:00

The sole purpose of this meeting was to reconsider the Vote on Motion M#6123-11 which was to take all of the operations of the Crowsnest Library centralize them in Blairmore and close the Bellevue Library.

What was one to expect? The silence of June 7th when council was notified in writing by the board, barely a word was spoken. Alternatively, were we to see the numerous concerns raised on June 21st, followed up by some spirited debate?

I sat and listened to first the discussion over how a motion had to be made to reconsider the previous motion, which could only be made by one of the councilors that previously voted against it, Councilor Gail accommodated that process. Then a short debate took place Councilor Gallant raised the issue of accessibility for wheelchairs, Councilor Saindon stated the obvious (one ride down to the Library any observer could see) there is a ramp and it is presently used. Councilor Mitchell must have had his concern about the Pass being long and narrow and clients of the Bellevue Library being able to access Blairmore addressed in the last week.

Mayor Decoux called for a Motion which was made by Councilor Londsbury, with the uniform raising of seven hands the Bellevue Library days are done, in eight minutes from start to finish it was over.

When at first you do not succeed try again-Bellevue Library

2011-06-27T13:45:00.000-07:00

I am sure by now everybody as heard that the Bellevue Library is closing July 1st.

Well not quite so fast, on June 7th at the G+P meeting there was correspondence from Pat Korble regarding closure of the Bellevue Library, council filed the letter as information. No huge concerns raised by anybody on council, in a matter of moments the issue is done with council moved on to the rest of the agenda. Advertisements notifying the public go in the paper end of the tale right.

To my surprise last Tuesday June 21st there is a delegation in front of council the CNP library board represented by Scott Howard is making a presentation to council. Apparently, the board had contacted the previous CAO who told them due to being an independent body that they had the authority to close the library. Up on further review of the boards bylaws by the board they determined this was not the case so they requested the opportunity to come in front of council. So Scott goes through his presentation, points out that they had a consultant review the libraries operations who recommended the closure of the library, he also stated that the board unanimously supported this position.

So began the debate did not expect much, given the opportunity just two weeks prior there was no issues raised. Suddenly out of nowhere comes concerns about the size of the Crowsnest Pass, how would people get to Blairmore that currently go to Bellevue, more time was required to look at this issue maybe it was being made in haste?. The issue of accessibility to the Blairmore Library for folks with disabilities concerns that could have all been raised on June 7th.

The Mayor called for a motion which Councilor Londsbury provided with his comments about this being a council that was elected to be more efficient, that the Crowsnest Pass can not justify two libraries. Fortunately or not (No nasty 4-3 vote to worry about) Councilor Saindon was not present. The vote was called by the chair with a result of 3-3 the motion was defeated, Mayor Decoux, Councilors Saje and Londsbury in favor, Councilors Gallant, Gail, and Mitchell opposed.

Subsequently I was told that the next day three members of the Library board resigned. Today I notice there as been a special meeting of council called for June 28 at 6:30pm. One issue to reconsider the Library motion of last week, I’m curious to see the debate, will the issue of the size of the Pass and getting people to Blairmore be rectified. Will the accessibility issues of the Blairmore location be resolved, will the issues that made a councilor feel last week that this decision was being made in haste, have been dealt with to his satisfaction?

Amazing June 7th no issues, June 21st lots of issues and June 28th I suspect this motion will just sail through.

Economic Task Force Report-Hotel Tax

2011-06-24T10:38:00.000-07:00

One of the recommendations coming out of the task force report to finance some of its suggestions is a tourism levy on hotel rooms.

Most people including myself, because we do not pay attention to the list of charges that are added on to your hotel room bills one after another. Do not realize that we already pay a Tourism levy of 4%, which is collected by the Alberta Government and then distributed, to Travel Alberta to market tourism in the province.

There are many towns, such as Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver, Banff and Canmore that have put in place a “Marketing Destination Fund”. This is an additional surcharge added to your room bill that that is used to market and promote that area.

In theory, it is a good idea and could be very effective as a revenue raiser under the right circumstances.

The other side:

• It’s another tax, anywhere from 1-3% is being charged

• Who collects and administrates the funds at what cost

• It’s voluntary so will all hotels collect it (Canmore Hotel and Lodging Association, states on its web site despite being in place for at least four years only 19% of the hotels in Canmore/Kananaskis charge the fee)

• What about the 4% we already pay that his intended to promote tourism, maybe our local and provincial politicians need to chase that source of funding.

• Most hotels charge it prior to the present tourism levy and GST, so the client now pays an additional 9% on the marketing destination charge.

• Will it apply to bed and breakfast accommodation?

• If the communities around you are not doing a similar process does it not become a deterrent, a significant number of our present hotel stays are crews working in the area that will spend tens of thousands of dollars at a time. An extra 2% on a $20,000 tab is $400 why not stay in Pincher and save those dollars some company’s will.

Any way I am sure, when council looks at this there will be some very spirited debate, it will also be interesting to see the reaction of our local hotels/motels.

More Change at the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass

2011-06-23T18:46:00.000-07:00

Effective July 13 Director of HR and Legislative Services Lynne Cox will be leaving the Municipality.

Bearsmart Program in the Crowsnest Pass

2011-06-23T13:07:00.000-07:00

I was asked to post the following link.

www.fuellingchange.com/main/project/102/Crowsnest-Pass-BearSmart-Program/1609082816

Please check it out there is an opportunity for the Crowsnest Pass to pick up $25,000 from Shell

Torch is passed to the "Dream Team"

2011-06-21T11:04:00.000-07:00

Mayor’s Final Task Force Report June 20 2011.

Well last night I attended the presentation of the Mayor’s Final Task Report, the task force and council was all there with by my estimation 150-200 local residents.

The Mayor gleefully informed us at the beginning that his council was now known as the “Dream Team”. I love dreams the only down side is when you are just really getting to enjoy one, you wake up and realize it was just a dream and now you have to deal with reality.

The Mayor put a lot of emphasis on the Task Forces member’s great wealth of expertise (no argument) and their many connections to the Crowsnest Pass. I think some how trying to distant the initial public reaction to the fact that there was no “locals” named to the team, but any way the report is here now and needs to be addressed.

Did I hear anything really new? No. I have always taken the position that there are many good ideas here in the Crowsnest Pass, the issue then, now and in to the future. Is embracing the ideas, implementing them and eventually the most important part of the equation paying for them.

Therefore, what did I hear from the report:

1. One unified community,

2. One Crowsnest Pass Fire and Rescue Department with one chief and multiple substations, one library system with multiple branches.

3. Hiring an Economic Development Officer

4. Clarity on the timing and route for the Highway 3 realignment

5. Establish a Community Economic Development Advisory Committee

6. “Crowsnest: Mountain Freedom” branding and put in place gateway signage

7. Establish a grant and funding process to support specific economic development projects

8. Full time Tourism Coordinator Position

9. Implementation of a Tourism levy as part of the hotel rate structure as well as a 1 cent/litre gas tax to fund tourism/community marketing.

10. Review and re-develop Rum Runner Days/Thunder in the Valley, establish a community committee to run this weekend, and develop a financial model that is transparent regarding sources and uses of funds and results in profits to the Municipality, local businesses and the event.

11. Seek investment or partner to add chair lift to the Pass Powderkeg Ski hill.

12. Work with historical partners to expand the Crowsnest Museum

13. Demolish and remediate the former Crowsnest Centre site and issue an RFP to developers for proposals to redevelop the site.

14. Investigate opportunities to re-appropriate the Bridgegate River Run property.

15. Work on a Centre for excellence in Field Studies

16. Develop strategy to attract new development.

17. Develop and maintain relationships with major employers.

18. Build community pride to increase support for local business

19. Explore feasibility of a regional Truck stop/Bulk Fuel/Tire Sales along Highway 3

20. Enhanced services and activities for retirees and seniors

21. Enhance amenities for families, community recreation centre

I have not listed all the recommendations, a lot of them are similar these are the ones that jumped out at me. The tricky part as I stated previously is going to be the implementation and paying for these great ideas. To that end the Mayor informed us that Council will be coming back to the public in early fall with a strategic plan.

How do we the public measure the success of this report? A couple of ways, 29 recommendations, 15 of them have a timeline of this year attached to them. Budget 2012 will be here before you know it.

Note: Just received a call mentioning to me that at this time we all need to keep in mind that these are the recommendations of the Task Force, Council does not have to accept them all, or any for that matter. Right now this is one of those famous political trial balloons so for my readers if you wish to influence where this report or any of its suggestions go. You need to speak to your members of council.

Randy thanks for the call, your right.

Mayors Task Force Report Crowsnest Pass

2011-06-21T08:57:00.000-07:00

Available on the Municipal Web site http://www.town.crowsnestpass.ab.ca/

Just click on the Final report of the Mayor's Task Force, June 20 2011

Note: I will share my comments soon.

Update on donation to Slave Lake.

2011-06-17T10:37:00.000-07:00

Despite some on Council not wishing to send the $2600 raised from the auction of Municipal Junk to Slave Lake.
Our neighbours at the Town of Pincher Creek followed up at their last council meeting by agreeing to send the same amount, http://www.pinchercreekecho.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3174186 to help those folks out. It was the right decision for the Pass to make, and it should have been unanimous, the money was raised by selling Junk that was no longer of any value to the community. No program had to lose funding, and no tax increase had to be put in place to show this small gesture of support for a community that suffered a lot.

Interim CAO for the Crowsnest Pass

2011-06-16T11:15:00.000-07:00

Tuesday night there was a new person sitting at the administration table, Mayor Decoux at one point during the discussion on the South Sasatchewan Regional Advisory Council referred to him as the Interim CAO. Surprisingly he did not introduce him, maybe he is saving it for the council meeting next week.
His name is Kevin Robins he worked for 24 years with the city of Leduc the last 12 as the CAO. He is presently the CEO of Transitional Solutions Inc. You can find more out about him at the following link.

Any way a big welcome to our new (Interim) CAO.

http://www.transitionalsolutions.ca/team

G+P meeting June 14, 2011

2011-06-15T14:17:00.000-07:00

G + P Meeting June 14, 2011

Adoption of Agenda:

Councilor Mitchell added a land issue In Camera.
Motion to accept agenda with additions passed unanimously

Delegations:

1. Crowsnest Community Support Society-Allison Johnson Day Program Team Leader. Interesting presentation about what the group does the number of people it looks after, and the facilities it operates. (Mountain view and Bagatelle). They also mentioned that they were visited by a couple of Councilors during the election campaign, who promised to look at their concerns and try to address them. (Expanded transportation for their clients nights and weekend, and accessibility into local businesses)

2. Alta Link-Crowsnest Pass Transmission Line Relocation Project-Kevin Strangeway. They gave a presentation about what Alta link does in the province its business scope. They had approached previous council about relocating the power line that presently runs from Frank to above the Blairmore cemetery down to the valley floor between the river and highway 3. Previously council had taken a strong position against this and unanimously taken the position that the municipality would take intervener status when they sought approval for this from the government regulatory body that approves these types of relocations. That position by the previous council paid off last night they informed council that they will be maintaining the line in its present location.

Topics for Discussion:

1. Request for a response to the advice given to the Government of Alberta for the South Saskatchewan Regional Plan.-Guest Speaker Mr John Squarek-Member of the South Saskatchewan Regional Advisory Council.

This document is available on the Government of Alberta web site, the council was a group of individuals placed together to look at the future land use directions of the province of Alberta. Crowsnest Pass is in the South Saskatchewan Regional which basically goes from Airdrie south to the US border and from the BC to Saskatchewan border. The council makes a recommendation that is then approved or not by the Alberta cabinet. All local plans (ie Municipal development plan etc) must conform with the regional plan. The plan and all the various steps and time lines to the process are available at the following address:

http://www.landuse.alberta.ca/RegionalPlans/SouthSaskatchewan/Default.aspx

On page 17 of the Council’s recommendation to the province there is a very relevant statement regarding our area:

4.5.1.3 Identify and develop new areas capable of becoming iconic tourism
destinations. Areas that should be considered include the Castle,
Crowsnest Pass, Kananaskis and the portion of the Canadian Badlands in
the region.

• Develop and manage the Castle and Crowsnest Pass as iconic
nature-based tourism destinations. Effectively manage the Castle without
necessarily designating it as a provincial park.

If you wish to have your say you need to go to the address above and provide your feedback to the province. There is no doubt this will have an impact on our area in the future.

In Camera: Motion to go In Camera passed unanimously.

Coming out of the Closet

2011-06-15T11:02:00.000-07:00

Coming out of the closet, this as nothing to do with politics. But for those that don't know me well, I am taking the opportunity after the better part of fourty years of hiding in the closet with all those other fans that have not had the opportunity to win a Stanley Cup in a longggggg time. I am proud of the Canucks and what they have accomplished this year, obviously my preference is for them to win the cup tonight but even if they don't I will still be very, very proud.
Another big plus in all of this, it sure makes that closet a little less crowded for all those Leaf fans in there.

So Go Canucks Go

Check this out very well done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-WQx2N1aXA

Rum Runner Days weekend

2011-06-14T09:57:00.000-07:00

First of all I got hammered last year because I referred to the costs for "Thunder in the Valley".

I clarified that it should have been the costs for the Rum Runner weekend, with Thunder in the Valley being just one of the events held that weekend. This is often a very contentious issue, but there is no question this is probably the largest single weekend for revenue for most Crowsnest Pass Businesses, certainly in the tourism industry. Anyway after a number of requests this is what the previous council budgeted for the 2010 “Rum runner days weekend”.

If you wish to check the numbers for 2011 you will have to contact either one of the present members of council or the municipal office.

Donation for Fireworks $4500
Traffic Control $6200
Policing $10000
Garbage + Toilets $11500
Activties + Entertainers $18000

Total $50200

This number does not allow for any municipal wages that go into preparation for the weekend. Which in my humble opinion would probably add another $20-30,000 to the weekend.

Why am I raising this now? two reasons, one I have been requested to by a number of my readers and two if you read Fridays Promoter there was an article about this weekend and the discussion that took place at last council meeting. Councilor Saje clearly indicated in his comments that in future years the weekend should be ran more has a business, and Councilor Gail requested of administration has to when the revenue numbers for the weekend would be made available by the fire department.

Any way due to my readers and the two fore mentioned councilors raising this issue the debate is open again regarding the “Rum Runner Weekend”.

Note: I have already refused one comment due to the fact that it made a derogatory comment regarding a fire department, keep your comments to the debate if you wish to have them published.

Dean's Rules

2011-06-09T09:50:00.000-07:00

The primary purpose of this blog is to discuss politics in the Crowsnest Pass, other issues are welcome also. You have the option of providing your name, you can remain anonymous if you wish. This blog is not about the individuals it is about the issues and the debate that follows. I welcome different opinions to mine if you disagree with my opinion then join the debate explain why. I am fine with that if you never choice to agree with me again in your life that is called Democracy.

What I will not welcome is personnel attacks, so if you choose to come on here and attack Joe Blow because he is not working, or he is different to you I will not publish that comment. Therefore, when you are writing your comments and I know some people spend a lot of time, if you take three seconds at the end to call somebody an idiot your time will be wasted and your opinion on that issue will not be heard.

Thank you Dean

Council Meeting of June 7, 2011

2011-06-08T11:35:00.000-07:00

Council Meeting of June 7, 2011

Mayor Decoux prior to the meeting commencing said some kind words about former Mayor Irwin’s years of service to the municipality and requested everybody present to take a moments silence.

Public Hearing: None

Agenda: Mayor Decoux added Emergent Land Issue in Camera. He also changed Item #5 under Bylaws to come after delegations. He deleted the following items correspondence #2 letter from Hon. Luke Ouellette regarding Federal Gas Tax Fund. He also deleted under other business, Drum Creek Flooding, Draft Budget Policy, and Municipal Office. He added Gifts for members of the task force under other business. Motion to accept the Agenda as amended was passed unanimously

Adoption of previous minutes:

1. Minutes of the Council Meeting of May 17, 2011, with minor corrections. Motion to accept was passed unanimously
2. Minutes of the Special Council Meeting of May 11, 2011, with minor corrections. Motion to accept was passed unanimously

Delegations:

1. Mark Murphy Emergency Management Field Officer for Southern Alberta reviewed the Emergency Management planning process with council and administration.

2. Larry Simpson, Director Strategic Philanthropy and Conservation for the Nature Conservancy gave an over view of what they do and stated that they own 1600 acres in the Pass and have conservation easements on 400 more acres.

Bylaws: 826 Land Use Bylaw third reading (Green Mountain Company in West Coleman)
Mayor Decoux gave the public the option to present anything new on this issue, no response either for or against.
Comments from council: Councilor Saindon needs to be convinced that the developer will address the public’s concerns.
Councilor Gallant felt that those issues would be covered off in the development agreement.
Councilor Gail had concerns about old mines workings, underground creeks, and the highway and really could not see this area being used for development. Motion for third reading passed 5-2 (Saindon/Saje opposed)

Administrative and Agency Reports: None

Business arising from the Minutes: None

Correspondence:
1. Municipality of Crowsnest Pass Library Board-Pat Korble-Closure of the Bellevue Library. Mayor Decoux asked for comments or questions none provided.

Committee Reports:
1. Minutes of May 24, 2011 G+P committee meeting, no discussion. Motion to accept passed unanimously.
2. Minutes of May 10, 2011 G+P committee meeting, no discussion. Motion to accept passed unanimously

Bylaws:
1. Bylaw 805,2011- Road Closure Frank Industrial Park (2nd & 3rd reading) No discussion. Motion passed 2nd reading 6-1 (Saje) 3rd reading passed 6-1 (Saje)
2. Bylaw 816, 2011 – Walking Trail Bylaw given (2nd & 3rd Reading). No discussion 2nd reading passed Unanimously, 3rd reading passed unanimously
3. Bylaw 821, 2011 – Property Tax Penalties Bylaw given (1st Reading) No discussion 1st reading passed unanimously
4. Bylaw 825, 2011 – Agricultural Services Board Bylaw given (2nd & 3rd Reading). No discussion 2nd reading passed unanimously 3rd reading passed unanimously.
5. Bylaw 826, 2011 – Land Use Bylaw Amendment given (3rd Reading) - (Green Mtn. Company) Dealt with previously after delegations.
6. Bylaw 828, 2011 – Traffic Bylaw Amendment given (1st Reading) No discussion passed 1st reading unanimously.
7. Bylaw 829, 1011 – Noise Bylaw Amendment given (1st Reading) No discussion passed 1st reading unanimously.
8. Bylaw 830, 2011 – Long Grass Bylaw Amendment given (1st Reading) No discussion passed 1st reading unanimously.
9. Bylaw 831, 2011 – Community Standards Bylaw Amendment given (1st Reading) No discussion passed 1st reading unanimously.
10. Bylaw 832, 2011 – Land Use Bylaw Amendment – Sign Standards given (1st Reading) – now has a Public Hearing No discussion passed 1st reading unanimously.
11. Bylaw 833, 2011 – Land Use Bylaw Amendment - Rezoning - given (1st Reading Tartal in Frank) – now has a Public Hearing No discussion passed 1st reading unanimously.

Notices of Motion: None

Other Business:
1. Rescind Endorsement Policy: Councilor Mitchell as been opposed to this policy from its concept, the intent of the policy was to have any council member inform council and seek its approval before appearing in any promotional material for business, developers etc. Motion to rescind passed 5-2 (Saindon/Gallant opposed)

2. Code of conduct for Council and Council committees: Motion to send this to the Policy committee passed 6-1 (Saindon opposed)

3. Council summer schedule: Motion to cancel July 26 G+P, August 2 Council and August 9 G+P, with an additional council to be added August 30. Motion passed 6-1 (Gallant opposed)

4. Draft reserve policy: Motion to accept passed unanimously.

5. Purchase gifts for task force: Mayor Decoux explained that the task force gave their time for free for five meeting since February, felt it reasonable to present the committee members with gifts up to a value of $2250. Motion passed unanimously

6. Draft Budget Policy: Motion to defer to the June 21st meeting passed unanimously.

7. Request for enhanced policing for Rum Runner Days: The municipality to pay $10,000 for 178 of policing, question of administration is this sufficient CAO stated that the RCMP felt not. Councilor Saje felt that moving forward this whole weekend needs to be dealt with more as a business plan, to get away from the huge costs the municipality incurs. Councilor Gail asked if administration had received a revenue report from the fire department yet for the weekend, administration stated they were still working on this. Motion to incur the $10,000 cost passed unanimously.

8. Independent Trucking Enterprise Parking Request: Request to park the coal haul trucks at the old Crowsnest Centre parking lot. Numerous concerns raised by council motion to defer to the next meeting passed 6-1 (Saindon opposed)

9. Municipal Auction Fund Disbursement: Administration recommended that the proceeds from the auction held on the weekend ($2700 approximately) be donated to the Town of Slave Lake. Councilor Mitchell strongly disagreed felt the money should be placed into reserves. Motion passed 5-2 (Saindon/Mitchell opposed)

10. Notice of Motion Transportation: Motion to have a needs assessment conducted and bring back to council on September 6th passed unanimously.

Council Member reports: Comments about various groups sending condolences regarding former Mayor Irwin.

Public Input: None

Motion to go In Camera: Passed Unanimously

****Additional information from last nights meeting****

The package from last nights meeting was just posted on the municipal web site. As noted previously Mayor Decoux deleted several issues from the agenda one of which was the Municipal Office.
Now reading the package I was expecting administration to come back with a reconfiguration as directed by Council a number of weeks ago.
Instead it again raises the issue of moving to the MDM which I have expressed my opinion on previouly. One of my concerns was the cost, especially when council has made it clear that they will improve inefficiencies by reducing the number of staff over time which would make the space issue in the office a non issue.
In the package it shows that $15,000 will be used to facilitate that move, with that money to come from savings by the delayed hiring of staff.
That raises a number of concerns with me first of all how necessary were those positions here we are almost half way through the year and they are still not filled.
Second of all its an old fiscal management trick to make one look good down the road by building additional costs in the budget and then showing savings at the end of the year.
Third it becomes a slush fund for ideas like these that should have been dealt with in the budget process and given a yes or no at that time, or did we not know that the proposed positions would require a place to be?
Fourth does this mean that administration does not believe Councils position that the work force will be reduced in time by the means that council has previously discussed.
Fifth these delays in hiring should provide the opportunity to save a few dollars that could be used to lessen the burden on the taxpayer next year.

Crowsnest Pass Economic Task Force Report

2011-06-07T12:21:00.000-07:00

According to municipal advertising the report will be released to the public on June 20, you will have your option of going to the MDM (7pm) for a presentation where the public will be given a copy of the report at the end of the meeting, in addition it will also be posted on the Municipal web site that same night.

Creating a picture by twisting the truth.

2011-06-06T12:53:00.000-07:00

Today I was reading an editorial in the Elk Valley Newspaper.

The following statements were written about Sparwood and Elkford.

"Sparwood has a vibrant seniors community and retirement home, a low residential tax base, fantastic
walking trails linking the Heights to central Sparwood, new businesses breaking ground, an indoor
recreation facility with a rock climbing wall, courts for volleyball and squash, an indoor pool, youth programs
and a community centre. The community will also soon have a state-of-the-art water park.
Elkford is also on the move. Like Sparwood, Elkford has a fantastic recreation complex with an indoor
pool. There will soon be a $6 million community facility that can host events and visitors from all over
the province. According to Mayor McKerracher, plans are also in the works to build a state-of-the-art
Fire Training Centre. The biggest benefit to living in Elkford is that their tax base is also incredibly low."

I know Sparwood and Elkford well, these statements so far are very accurate.
Then the article goes on to state the following:

"All these amenities which both Sparwood and Elkford possess are the result of diligent and thoughtful Councils, both past and present"

That's all it takes is diligent and thoughtful Councils to have all of the above. Silly me I though all of these things might have had something to do with a little thing called the "Elk Valley Property Tax Sharing Agreement" that's the agreement that specifies how the taxes that are levied on the mines each year are spilt amongst the communities.
Each year Elkford receives $3 million, Sparwood $2.8 million and Fernie $2.6 million.
Keeping in mind that to have all of those amenities listed above in 2009 the Districe of Sparwood collected $10,689,638 in taxes. In the same year the Crowsnest Pass collected $6,359,661 in taxes a difference of $4,329,977 with 70% of that difference being made up by the mines and most of the other 30% coming from businesses servicing the mines.

Lets face it, some people think we have a diligent and thoughtful council presently, the realities of the Crowsnest Pass having nothing to do with "diligent and thoughtful" it's all to do with cold hard cash. The community can't even keep the Bellevue Library open, let alone build an Indoor facility to match our neighbours. Then again maybe the residents of the Pass are willing to pay an extra $4 million a year in taxes to have everything our neighbours have got, because the Elk Valley is not going to share with us.

Note: Link to Elk Valley Tax Sharing Agreement http://www.elkford.ca/modules/news/newsitem.php?ItemId=7

Bellevue Library

2011-06-06T09:03:00.000-07:00

I was saddened to hear on the weekend that the Bellevue Library is closing July 1st. Have not heard all the details yet but I was under the impression that the usage numbers were up?
I suspect there will be lots of comments when the paper comes out this week.
Will this result in a decreased costs to the municipality for their share of maintaining and operating one library?

Public Transportation in the Crowsnest Pass

2011-05-30T14:09:00.000-07:00

Last week council was given a presentation regarding public transportation.

Cam Mertz presented an analysis that showed, a public transportation system running Monday through Friday with 24 stops between West Coleman and the MDM operating 14 hours per day.
Based on the revenue numbers provided there would be $25,200 a year coming in divided by 250 days per year that's $100 per day at $2 per trip 50 passengers a day or 4 per hour or $8 per hour.

On the cost side of the equation the numbers showed that the service would cost $201,600 to set up and $311,950 to operate, divided by 250 days per year that's $1248 per day or $89 per hour.
Plus every year an additional $30,000 would have to be put aside to cover the replacement of the bus every three years, in reality the cost would increase to $1368 per day or $98 per hour.

Cost minus revenue leaves this service being subsidized by the taxpayer to the tune of $90 per hour.

The key questions have to be asked here, first of all is there a need and can we afford it.

Looking at the present town rounder its clientele averages somewhere between 8 and 12 daily.
So is the 50 passengers a day realistic? lets look at our neighbours, the Regional District of East Kootenay offers a daily service that runs between Sparwood/Elkford/Fernie and the South Country (Once a week).
Their budget for 2011 based on having twice the population in the Elk Valley that we do plus having a service that runs between communties not just within their boundaries is 6000 passengers. So yes I feel the 12600 rides here is a little optimistic.
Even if the numbers turn out to be real we are looking at having every home in the Crowsnest Pass pay an additional $100 to fund a service that will be used by 4 people per hour.
How many tmes a day do you think you will see that bus travelling back and forth empty.
Unless of course there is $317,000 per year in inefficiencies in the present budget that can be saved.

If there is that kind of fat in our municipal budget first of all I would like to know where, and second I would want to know why we would not just get a $100 tax reduction.

There was some suggestions about reducing those costs, charge $3 per trip selling advertising on the bus (lets assume $20,000 per year), then the cost would come down to only $81 per hour. Even with all that considered if you reduced the service to three days a week it would still cost the taxpayers $200,000 per year.

The municipality will be sending out a survey with an upcoming utility bill to ask for the public's input. I hope with in that survey it explains the costs of this venture, and the assumptions of how many people will use the service. Too often people will support an idea because it sounds good up front, its one of those things government should be doing. Then they are out raged later when they find out the cost.

I don't mind paying taxes for things we need, schools, hospitals, roads, recreation facilities etc etc. But for a transportation system that will be funded to the tune of $90 per hour for an average of four riders?

But then again maybe just maybe this is one of those old political games, maybe there is no intent to proceed with this idea at all. Maybe its just going through the motions.

Municipal government and transparency in the Crowsnest Pass

2011-05-30T09:51:00.000-07:00

After much noise being made about the transparency of municipal politics in the Crowsnest Pass. I have been asked the following question by a number of people. Regarding weather business conducted at retreats is open to the public. My understanding of the MGA is if somebody makes a request under FOIP has long as it does not involve Land, Legal, or Labour the municipality is required to provide that information to any interested taxpayer.

Its not a unreasonable expectation

Below is Councilor Gallants.

"Retreats are common with all municipal governments. In order to reduce expense we have hosted our retreats in council chambers so they may look like a council meeting but they are not. No decisions can be made at a retreat and typically it is just a chance to vet ideas. The results of our retreats will be made public once the information is compiled and written out in a format that makes sense. I believe this is FOIP-able as well as long as it is not one of the three L’s I mentioned above. Anyone is welcome to pursue FOIP action if they feel it is necessary."

Clarification of Council renumeration in the Crowsnest Pass

2011-05-26T11:18:00.000-07:00

Got a call from a lady today who had told me that she was reading on a councilors blog that he was receiving around $2.50 per hour for attending council business and was very surprised. I quote the following:

"As for my wages I receive an honorarium that probably works out to about $2.50 an hour, as for benefits there is none from the Municipality.

I maintain a full time job during the day and when I take time off during the day for Municipal issues I take time and pay off my regular job which pays me more than $2.50 an hour. So as a simple fact I lose money every time I attend a meeting during the day."

Note: Not for one minute am I suggesting that Councilors are over paid in 6 years on council I made less than $14,000 per year. In fact when Councilor Mitchell suggested last fall that Council renumeration should be cut by 5% I spoke against it. (Little surprised that Councilor Mitchell did not suggest that with the present council) Maybe it wasn't a real issue, keep in mine that 5% reduction would have decreased a $4.5 million labour bill by $5,000.

Well unless this policy got changed since I left council the above statement is not really true. Councilors receive an honorarium of $500 per month which at $2.50 per hour would work out to 200 hours put month, I doubt any councilor is putting in 50 hours per week.
In addition Councilors also receive $70 per meeting with the average meeting running about 3 hours so $23.33 per hour, if the meeting turns into a full day (retreats etc) they receive $160 for an average of 8 hours or $20 per hour.

G + P Meeting May 24, 2011

2011-05-25T13:55:00.000-07:00

Adoption of Agenda:

Mayor Decoux made the following changes
Under Topics of Discussion deleted Item #6, and added under In Camera Personnel CAO Recruitment
Motion to accept agenda with additions passed unanimously

Delegations:

Neil Chalmers-Replaced Andrew Rusynyk-Regarding the Ed Gregor Memorial Stewardship Day-June 4, 2011. Spoke to all the hard work that is done by volunteers and invited Mayor and Council to attend.

Topics for Discussion:
1. Bylaw No. 821-Property Tax Penalties:. Administration pointed out this will not apply to local improvements. Motion to recommended this bylaw to council passed unanimously

2. Draft Budget Policy:
No discussion, Motion to recommend this policy to council passed unanimously.

3. Draft Reserve Policy: Councilor Saindon asked administration if actual numbers would be added to the policy at budget time. Yes. Motion to recommended this policy to council passed unanimously

4. Bylaw Revisions:
• Long Grass Bylaw
• Traffic Bylaw
• Noise Bylaw
• Community Standards Bylaw
Discussion spoke to definitions and penalties would now be clear, and that yard sale signs must be removed within seven days. Motion to recommended this bylaw to council passed unanimously

5. Land Use Bylaw Amendment-Section 11-Sign standards: Motion to recommended this bylaw to council passed unanimously

6. Deleted

7. Notice of Motion-Transportation:
This issue relates back to Councilor Saje request for administration to come up with an alternative transportation system for the Crowsnest Pass. Administration will be bringing back at a later date the information to provide transportation outside the municipality.

Cam Mertz presented a report that included the following points:

• Service based on 5 days per week 14 hours per day
• Starting at the Volker Sevin yard in Coleman and ending at the MDM with 22 additional stops in between, with a 30 second stop at each location
• Would require new bus and two operators.
• Revenue based on 15 riders per shift cost of $2 per trip $35,000 per year.
• Cost would be $312,000 to operate and an additional $30,000 for capital costs.
• Capital Outlay would be $201,000 up front due to the amount of mileage placed on the Bus it would require replacing every three years.
• Funding Mertz indicated that there would possibly be some Federal or provincial funding to buy the bus, but the only funding that could be used is the MSI operational funding that presently is used else where in the municipal budget.
• Alternatives (1) Look at combining with the present town rounder, very difficult due to the scheduling requirements of the present clients, (2) Contract out the service or, (3) Look at the same service on a reduced basis.

Following issues were raised by Council:

Any time built into the schedule for breakdowns? No
Is going Diesel instead of gas an Option? Yes
Could we approach business to support this service? Yes
BC provides a regional service have we looked at that? Yes but we are not in BC
Have we compared to the rates that taxi’s charge? No
Councilor Gallant pointed out that since the election only one person as raised this as being an issue with him, he is not convinced that a need as been established.
What would be the issue of combining with the present service? Hard to work around present clients schedules, the community as made it very clear that they do not want the present service disrupted in any way.
Prices elsewhere show an average of $3 per trip, why did we not use that number here? The present cost per trip is $2.
Have we considered running a half-day on Saturdays? Administration will consider anything that council requests.
Can we sell advertising on the bus to raise money? Yes
How would other service providers feel about the municipality competing with them? They would not be thrilled with a heavily subsidized municipal service competing with them.
Would there be an option to work with the school boards? Administration believes that could be a possibility.

Motion was made for administration to under take a needs assessment and report back to council by Sept 6. Motion passed unanimously.

8. Discussion of Bylaw #826,2011 (Green Mountain Company rezoning in West Coleman):
Randy Tucker spoke for the local residents emphasized the importance of the following issues:
Appearance of the buildings
Safety concern with Highway 3
Density of proposed buildings
Parking volumes

In Camera: Motion to go In Camera passed unanimously.

Crowsnest Pass CAO Update

2011-05-24T11:44:00.000-07:00

On John Prince's blog there is a further update on this situation.

http://blog.johnprince.ca/2011/05/councillor-gallant-appeals-to-residents.html

Change in the Crowsnest Pass, CAO is leaving Wow

2011-05-19T15:26:00.000-07:00

Resignation

Note: Check out the following article pointed out to me by one of my readers.

www.crowsnestpasspromoter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?archive=true&e=2860758

There is more available from this reader/commenter just go down to the right side of my blog and click on the Miners Journey.

The purpose of this email is to let you know I’ve submitted my resignation to Council, my last day of work in Crowsnest Pass will be June 15, 2011. Though my time here has been short I’ve really enjoyed working with all employees. It’s difficult working for local government as we are criticized often and praised seldom. Please know that I appreciate your efforts and acknowledge that Crowsnest Pass could not survive without the fine work of the employees of the Municipality. I’m glad that so many of you recognize that we’re working for our friends and neighbours and that you come to work each day to perform your duties to the best of your ability. Because of your efforts the Municipality offers a very wide range of services and programs to our residents and businesses. Though Council speaks of change you should be proud of your day-to-day work and all your accomplishments and not view change as a negative. Change is difficult and is often seen as a criticism. I challenge you instead to look at change as an opportunity to make a good organization even better. Through change it is hoped that additional opportunities for growth and advancement will be made available to employees and that Crowsnest Pass will continue to evolve as a fantastic place to live and visit. Thank you for working with me during my short time here.

Tully

Crowsnest Pass Municipal Office Does it need to grow?

2011-05-19T11:29:00.000-07:00

Recently a number of people have asked me about the municipal office. There appears to be a controversy brewing about relocating some office staff to a different location. A little background to give the reader a better sense of what is causing the problem.

Right now you have twenty people in the office, the CAO, four department heads a contract assessor, safety officer, bylaw officer, and twelve ladies looking after the various functions covered by those departments.

Again that’s twenty people, this last budget council added a number of full time positions, a Foreman, one person in HR, one person in the recreational department a weed control person, and a half time position in finance.

Anybody that reads my blog understands how I feel about the additional positions, but that was the council’s decision. Validated by an argument that to find more inefficiency and determine where job duties could be changed or combined, it took those additional people to make that happen, briefly short-term growth that will eventually shrink the work force. Well I still do not buy that argument I have never seen at any level (municipal, provincial or federal) where government has shrunk.

Back to the issue at hand, for a while rumors having been floating around the community about the Recreation Department moving to the MDM, due to the shortage of space in the present office.

First is the lack of space has big an issue as it first appears to be? There is a vacant Foreman’s office downstairs so that position is looked after. The weed control person has worked out of the MDM for the last couple of years as a seasonal position, nothing as changed there. The part time position for finance as been accommodated in the finance department for the last three years. Realistically the additional space is required for two people HR and Recreation.

Can the office be reconfigured to cover off those positions? Council believes so at the last G+P they directed administration to come back with a plan that allows for that. From what I have heard administration is coming back to the next G+P meeting still looking at moving to the MDM. Obviously if this is the case communications are breaking down some where I was at that last meeting Council’s direction was very clear.

More arguments for maintaining all the staff in one building;

Costs I do not care what argument you make there will be a cost, to set up at the MDM is it $10,000, $20,000 I have no idea but there will be a cost, so where does that money come from? Is that dollars that could have gone into reserves.

One stop shopping, presently the taxpayer can go into the office pay a utility bill, check on a development permit, talk to the bylaw office and check out a recreation program, basically take care of all your municipal business in one stop.

Redundancy, present council’s position that they are going to reduce the workforce over time by attrition, due to improved efficiency at all levels. If this proves to be true, the office at the MDM would be redundant in a couple of years anyway due to additional space being created in the Coleman office.

Better utilization of MDM space, prior to leaving council we were told that all the space at the MDM was leased out. To maximize cost recovery at the MDM why would you not rent every foot of space you can, that space that is being saved for the administration at the MDM could be rented out to a group which would lessen the burden on the taxpayers to operate that building.

Efficient utilization of staff, during vacation periods there are times where there is very minimal staff in the municipal office which occasionally requires staff to assist in other areas than there own. This would become a bigger issue if staff were spread out over various locations.

Supervision of staff, we all recognize that administration receives vacation during those timeframes being in one building if there is an issue and the department head is away there would be other administrators in the office that could deal with that particular issue.

Smaller issues, maintain two sets of office supplies, extra photocopier, and additional costs for people to run back and forth between the two locations. Co-ordination between departments you can have all the technology in the world but there are going to be times when a person needs to talk face to face with another person in a different department.

Council Meeting of May 17, 2011 Crowsnest Pass

2011-05-18T11:37:00.000-07:00

Council Meeting of May 17, 2011

Public Hearing:

1. Bylaw 826,2011 Land Use Amendment-Green Mountain Company

Favour: Lowry Toombs, Royal LePage realtor spoke in favour of the rezoning from Non-Urban to Multi-Residential on behalf of Mark Kirwin, developer from the Green Mountain Company who is interested in developing lands in West Coleman for high-density housing such as multi-four-plexes

Against – Randy Tucker, on behalf of the West Coleman Community submitted documentation against the development for Council’s review.

Mayor Decoux requested that Mr. Tucker and other residents present for the public hearing meet with Mr. Toombs and Mr. Kirwin outside of Chambers to review the concept as presented and to return when the rezoning Bylaw was being reviewed by Council for 2nd and 3rd reading.

Adoption of Agenda:

Mayor Decoux added three items under other business, Realtors Request, Lions Club and Slave Lake, Councilor Gail added one item under In Camera, Land. Councilor Londsbury added one item under other business, Councilor absence for the next G+P meeting. Motion to accept the Agenda as amended was passed unanimously

Adoption of previous minutes:

Minutes of the Council Meeting of May 3, 2011, with one slight correction. Motion to accept was passed unanimously

Delegations: None

Administrative and Agency Reports: None

Business arising from the Minutes: None

Correspondence:

1. Hon Luke Ouellette, Minister of Transportation-Bridge Funding provided by the province for the Sentinel Bridge. Motion to file for information passed Unanimously.

2. Hon Hector Goudreau, Municipal Excellence, awards given out by the province each year to municipalities achieving certain degrees of excellence. Motion to file for information passed Unanimously (Mayor Decoux advised that in future years the Crowsnest Pass will be looking at this has they will be doing many Innovative initiatives)

3. Crowsnest Community Trails Ribbon Cutting Ceremony, Motion to table until take Council meeting passed Unanimously.

Committee Reports:

1. Minutes of April 11, 2011 Municipal Heritage Board, no discussion. Motion to accept passed unanimously.

Bylaws:

1. Bylaw 816,2011- Walking Trail Bylaw (1st reading) No discussion Motion passed unanimously

2. Bylaw 825,2011- Agricultural Services Board Bylaw (1st reading) Councilor Saindon asked if all provincial criteria had been met? Yes Motion passed unanimously

3. Bylaw 826,2011- Land Use Amendment (2th + 3rd reading) Concerns rose about height of units, coal in the area, Highway 3, wildlife, and green space. Motion for 2nd reading passed 4-3 (Saindon, Mitchell, Saje opposed) Motion to table third reading to give time to examine information received from residents in opposition, passed unanimously.

Notices of Motion: None

Other Business:

1. Blairmore Mobile Home Site

Councilor Gallant started the debate, concerns with displacing seniors, no plan in place for the land, did not want to see another Kananaskis trailer court situation, also the issue that the community lacks affordable housing.

Councilor Saindon raised concerns regarding where do these people go, what value would there homes have, how well this area is looked after a fact that other residents should pay attention to.

Councilor Mitchell made a motion to force the trailers out if they are sold, or if they need to be moved for repairs, Councilor Saindon made an amendment to say that new trailers could not be brought into the area, this was defeated by a vote of 4-3 (Gail, Saindon, Mitchell in support). Councilor Saje made a motion to table this issue until the Municipal Development Plan or further planning is in place this passed by a vote of 4-3 (Saindon, Gallant, Gail opposed)

2. Bylaw Enforcement Report, No discussion Motion to accept passed unanimously

3. Practices and Procedures review, Mayor Decoux spoke to the possibility that an external group could be used for this process. Motion to accept passed unanimously.

4. Three Year Budget Cycle, Motion made to review this concept prior to the next budget process beginning was passed unanimously, CAO informed council that this would be coming to the policy committee May 18, 2011

5. Approval for Commercial signage on Municipal property, portable sign at the Blairmore Liquor Store. Motion to accept passed unanimously.

6. Community Standards-Municipal Facilities, despite some concerns raised by the Public Works Director. Motion to move forward with this was passed unanimously.

7. Removal of municipal reserve designation-Coleman athletic park across from the old Coleman Collieries building. Motion to accept passed unanimously

8. Correspondence to SRD-Recreational roadways. To the minister and local MLA regarding allowing the municipal to be a part of any discussions regarding recreational roadways with the Atlas road being the highest priority. Motion to accept passed unanimously

9. Council agenda committee, Mayor Decoux felt that this would take up to much time, felt that it should be a part of the review of the G+P committee and the procedural bylaw. Motion to table to that time passed unanimously

10. Parade schedule, council members to notify Lynne Cox to their availability.

11. Appointment to the Municipal Heritage Board, Motion to appoint Gale Comin for another two year term passed unanimously

12. Realtor’s request to waive off site levies, administration still working on.

13. Lions club request, administration still working on

14. Slave Lake challenge from the town of Nanton to other communities to help Slave lake agree to defer to the G+P meeting.

15. Councilor Londsbury’s request for permission to miss the next G+P meeting passed unanimously.

Council Member reports: Usual report about various meeting attended by members of council. One exception Councilor Gail made the statement that “there are a lot of messes in this community that need to be cleaned up” I look forward to future meeting to see how he clarifies this statement, and to the initiatives he brings forth to achieve these goals.

Public Input: None

Motion to go In Camera: Passed Unanimously

Great Editorial In this week's Promoter "Public debate is cornerstone of democracy"

2011-05-13T18:14:00.000-07:00

At a recent council meeting, one member, clearly irritated, wondered why issues were being "hashed out" in council chambers after the policy committee had already met and made a recommendation.

This musing should set off alarm bells for a number of reasons.

First, it is not enough that an issue be sent to a committee and then have that committee decide the matter without public transparency. Not only is the public excluded from policy committee meetings, and by extension the press, but also not every council member is in attendance. Yes, they have the ability to provide input prior to the meeting, but they are not included at the debate.

Taxpayers have the right to hear that debate, to know each council member's opinion and to be privy to any subsequent vote.

Another issue regarding development plans for the municipality apparently entailed "numerous meetings", again behind closed doors.

We recognize that while certain issues require confidentiality to protect the individual, those that impact the taxpayer financially or philosophically require transparency.

Council should let the public judge for themselves what's important, whether it involves significant tax dollars or not. All policies and bylaws affect residents, one way or another. Discussions on how they are arrived at need to be heard.

Transparency and accountability have become cliqued political fodder in recent times. Let's ensure these principles remain firmly planted in Crowsnest Pass.

http://www.crowsnestpasspromoter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3119396

Closing a Trailer Court. History really does repeat itself in the Crowsnest Pass.

2011-05-12T08:45:00.000-07:00

Note: At the east end of Blairmore along the river there are a number of lots (15) owned by the Municipality, these are occupied by single wide trailers. Which in some cases have been there prior to the Municipality being formed (1979).

Tuesday night at the G+P meeting a motion was made by Councilor Londsbury to give notice to the residents that they have 6 years to remove their homes. In the event that they sell prior to that time they will be required to remove them immediately, if there is a problem with the water line under the trailers they will be required to move them immediately.

Mayor Decoux made a friendly amendment to the motion to change the notice period to four years. This was accepted by the mover, the motion was passed by a vote of 5-2 with Councilors Gail and Gallant opposed. The motion will now go to regular council next Tuesday (May 17th) to be debated again by the same seven people.

What’s the significance of this motion?

Where do they go?

Several things it was noted by the Municipal assessor that there is nowhere for these trailers to go, the Trailer Court is full and people in R1 areas do not want trailers in there neighborhoods, especially older ones.

How do they sell there homes?

By this action Council as rendered these homes as next to worthless, who is going to purchase one knowing they have to move it immediately and have nowhere to move it.

Does the municipality have a better use for the land?

It was stated at the meeting that there is “no” plans for that land at this time.

Maybe there is somebody waiting to seize what would be a great development opportunity?

It’s a prime piece of land next to the river, would be very attractive to somebody with a few dollars to slap six or seven high end homes in there.

Didn’t this happen previously with another trailer court?

Yes, roughly ten years ago the Kananaskis Trailer Court next to the arena in Coleman was closed it was touted as providing land for possible expansion of the recreational facility down the road. For those that don’t live here it is vacant and full of weeds today with no plans for it on the books.

Isn’t there a water line that runs underneath those homes?

Yes there is and I’m sure that will become a big part of the justification to move these homes, but keep in mind some of those homes have been there for 30+ years, the water line as never been a significant issue.

Is there anything we can do?

Politicians react to public pressure, call the municipality ask for a councilors phone number call them voice your opinion.

G + P Meeting May 10, 2011

2011-05-11T20:13:00.000-07:00

G + P Meeting May 10, 2011

Adoption of Agenda:

Items added under Topics of Discussion
9. Municipal Office, 10. Atlas Road, 11. Community Standards 12. 13 ways to kill a community.
Motion to accept agenda with additions passed unanimously

Delegations:

1. Dan Mckim-Member of Livingston Landowners Group
Presented a lot of information on the impact of the Micrex Burmis Magnetite Mine Proposal.

Topics for Discussion:

1. Crowsnest Community Trails Bylaw:
Proposed bylaw regarding the community trails,
After some questions about hours of operation, restrictions on the use of poles, and horses not allowed on the trails. Process for cleaning the trails. Motion to recommended this bylaw to council passed unanimously

2. Agricultural Services Board Bylaw:
No discussion, Motion to recommend this bylaw to council passed unanimously.

3. Blairmore Mobile Home Sites.
The Municipality owns a numbers of mobile trailer lots along the Crowsnest River at the east end of Blairmore. Which it in turn rents out 10-12 lots to mobile trailer. Which in some cases were there prior to the Municipality being formed in 1979? A motion was moved by Councilor Londsbury to give the residents six years notice to remove their trailers, with the understanding that if the residents sold the trailers prior to that timeframe they would be forced to move the trailers and/or if the municipality needed access to the waterline that runs under the trailers they would be forced to move them. Mayor Decoux made a friendly amendment to reduce the time frame to four years, which was accepted. The question was asked if there was any specific plans for the land (No), it was also made clear that there was no trailer courts for these people to move their trailers to, and that most residents were opposed to them being placed in R1 areas.
Motion to recommend this policy to council passed by a vote of 5-2 with Councilors Gail and Gallant opposed.

4. Bylaw Implementation Report:
Concerns about the efforts of the bylaw office being communicated to council and the public. Motion made that a report regarding this issue will be presented to council on a quarterly basis. Motion to recommended this policy to council passed unanimously

5. Practices and Procedures review.
Council desires to see a process put in place where every department would review all of its practices and procedures on a rotational basis every five years. After some debate between council and administration about the vagueness of the request and the lack of funds within the budget process to carry this out it was agreed that it would begin in the early part of 2012 beginning with the public works department. With discussion during the next budget, process to allow for any costs incurred. Motion to recommended this policy to council passed unanimously

6. Sustainability Review.
Administration informed council that they are two thirds of the way through this process that they will be bringing it back to council in 2-3 weeks.

7. Budget Format.
Mayor Decoux spoke about the difficulty of a new council dealing with a budget shortly after being elected and the large amount of time involved with dealing with it. Suggested that the budget should be done on a three-year basis. The CAO stated that they are already working on this and will be bringing back to council at the next G+P meeting.

8. Council agenda:
Mayor Decoux felt that councils have become to dependent on Administration to set agenda’s for council meetings. He believes that the agenda is no longer reflective of the issues that concern the community. Feels that a new committee needs to put in to place that would meet once or twice a week as required comprised of a number of councilors and administrators to put together a Council agenda. At this point, the strangest thing happened Mayor Decoux turned to Councilor Mitchell and said go ahead and make the motion, Councilor Mitchell responded with isn’t Councilor Gail making this motion. (????? Maybe I missed something?????) Motion to recommended this policy to council passed unanimously

9. Municipal Office.
Mayor Decoux raised the issue of the present building not providing sufficient space for the present staff plus new additions, as heard that one department is considering moving out of the office. He made it clear that council would like to see Administration bring in outside assistance to help with a reconfiguration of the office that would allow all departments to be fitted into the existing office. A motion was made to bring this back to the next G+P meeting, which passed unanimously.

10. Atlas Road.
In a meeting with Spray Lakes the concern was raised about maintaining the Atlas Road, Spray Lakes logging operations in that area are coming to an end, they are looking for assistance as to who is going to maintain the road, or as to if SRD will force them to return what is a very popular road to its original condition. A motion was made to send a letter to SRD and the local MLA requesting that the municipality become a stakeholder in that process. Motion was passed unanimously.

11. Community Standards.
Discussion regarding the enhancement of the community and the continued enforcement by the municipality. Council felt that the community as been given a year to clean up. Council is going to work on this issue at the next policy committee meeting, which all of council will be invited to, but Councilor Mitchell stated it would not be open to the media or the public. Councilor Saindon made a Motion that the municipality must clean up all of its properties of any derelict or obsolete vehicles or equipment within the next thirty days. This motion was passed unanimously.

12. 13 ways to kill a community:
Councilor Gail spoke about a presentation he attended in Pincher Creek, put on by the Chamber of commerce regarding Doug Griffths and his book 13 ways to kill a community. Felt the presentation was very good and would be valuable to work with the Chamber in the Pass to do the same presentation. The rest of Council agree with this and asked administration to contact the Chamber to look at this.

In Camera: None

Motion to adjourn: Passed unanimously.

Teck/Fording River accept contract

2011-05-08T19:55:00.000-07:00

Untied Steel workers @ Teck's Fording River operation accept deal by 87%

Council Meeting of May 3, 2011 Crowsnest Pass

2011-05-04T11:50:00.000-07:00

Council Meeting of May 3, 2011

Adoption of Agenda:

Mayor Decoux added two items under other business, rescheduling retreat and Prosperous Places, Councilor Saje added one item under other business the Bellevue Campground and one Land item under In Camera, Councilor Gail added one Land item under In camera, and Councilor Saindon added two personnel items under In camera.
Motion to accept the Agenda as amended was passed unanimously

Adoption of previous minutes:
Minutes of the Council Meeting of April 19, 2011, with some slight corrections. Motion to accept was passed unanimously

Delegations: None

Administrative and Agency Reports: None

Business arising from the Minutes:

1. Motion Review 2004-2010 17 motions that were passed during council of those times that are still in the process of being dealt with by administration, (six of which are Land and will we dealt with In Camera), Motion made to schedule a Special Meeting to deal with these, passed by a vote of 6-1 (Councilor Gallant opposed)

Correspondence: None

Committee Reports:

1. Minutes of April 12, 2011 G+P Committee, Motion to accept passed unanimously.

2. Minutes of March 27, 2011 Subdivision and Development Authority, Motion to accept passed unanimously.

Bylaws: None

Notices of Motion: None

Other Business:

1. Crowsnest Lions Club- Multi year lease Blairmore Seniors Building, After much debate about the condition of this building and the merits of keeping it, fixing it up or getting rid of it, in addition to placing the group in another venue. Administration was directed to bring this issue back to council with more information. Motion passed unanimously

2. FCSS Board Appointments, Leslie McCallum, Val Danielson, and Rose Farfus appointed for three-year terms unanimously.

3. Full Moon Adventure Company-Waiver of Bylaw #722, Councilor Gallant excused himself at this point, Motion to accept was passed unanimously.

4. Budget Update, BDO presented 2010 Financial Audits. Head of Finance Marion Vanoni made the following comments:

Municipality increased its assets by $910,000 in 2010.
The financial report shows that there is $2.8 million in cash but $2.1 million in liabilities and accounts payable.
There are property tax issues with some developers
This was the second year of clear audits (some previous audits were qualified due to reporting issues with the Crowsnest Centre, can read on the Municipal web site).
Property taxes showed for 2011 at $6.7 million when actual will only be $6.5 million some taxes are anticipated to be uncollectible.
Mayor Decoux wished to know does administration review licensing fees on a regular basis. ($$$)
After some debate regarding the timeliness of not receiving the report prior to the meeting Motion to accept was passed 5-2 (Mitchell and Saje opposed)

5. Crowsnest Pass/Elk Valley elected officials meeting June 22, 2011 in Elkford. Councilor Saje wanted to know if he could attempt to set up a round of golf with all the various groups prior to the meeting. Motion to accept passed unanimously.

6. Amendments to the Septage Bylaw 823, further research was done by administration after the bylaw was passed, it was found that the proposed rate was too high compared to other municipalities, administration recommended a lower rate. Motion to accept passed Unanimously

7. North Area Structure Plan- Regarding the development of an Area Structure Plan for the area north of the high school, after some debate about the cost ($15000) of using ORRSC to undertake this work. Motion of council to accept this process passed unanimously.

8. Equipment Purchase- Administration as determined that a new trailer is needed to transport the new track hoe to various locations ($25,000) Motion of council passed by a vote of 5-2 (Gallant and Saindon opposed)

9. Equipment Replacement Policy- This policy as come in front of council previously very detailed policy that requires $408,000 per year to be placed in reserves to meet the municipalities needs, the following comments were made:
What will be the impact on the residents tax bill, Administration stated that it could be significant but that will be determined during the budget process by council.
Concern about doing this policy in isolation when council knows that other reserves will also have to be addressed including overall reserves, Buildings, Infrastructure in addition to the Equipment policy.
Councilor Mitchell stated that the community must accepted that more dollars are going to have to be brought in from the taxpayers, the municipality cannot continue at zero tax increases.
Councilor Saindon stated that these types of costs must and will be covered off by reductions in operating costs, getting rid of inefficiencies, duplication of services, etc.
Motion to pass the policy carried unanimously

10. Reschedule Retreat to May 10. Motion passed unanimously.

11. Prosperous Places presentation to be put on in Fort Macleod, Motion to send Mayor Decoux, Councilors Saje and Gail passed unanimously.

12. Bellevue Campground Councilor Saje reported that somebody appears to be squatting in the Bellevue Campground, point was made that the property is owned by the Alberta transportation department, administration to check out and bring back to council.

Council Member reports: None

Public Input: None

Motion to go In Camera: Passed Unanimously

Alberta Venture Magazine Crowsnest Pass Development

2011-05-04T10:12:00.000-07:00

Story from May's addition of the Alberta Venture Magazine very well written by Joni MacFarlane from the Crowsnest Pass.

Troubled Waters: The Rough Side of Real Estate Investing in Alberta

A pair of salesmen told an Alberta coal mining town that it could be a resort destination. Six years later, the scenic Crowsnest Pass is still learning a tough lesson about easy money and the business of real estate

http://albertaventure.com/2011/05/troubled-waters/

Teck tentative agreement at Fording River

2011-05-03T11:28:00.000-07:00

Good news for the local economy Teck and the Steelworkers at Fording River have reached a tentative agreement, the Memorandum of agreement is available at http://www.usw7884.com/Final%20Draft%20of%20MOA.pdf

Election night the Canadian people spoke.

2011-05-03T10:50:00.000-07:00

Well finally some sanity as returned to Canadian Politics.
Minority governments do not work the largest party as to dance with the devil to get their agenda through.
I still can't believe that some people think its acceptable to jump into bed with a party that wants to break the country up.
What happened last night I think the largest group of Canadians accepted that the economy is the issue.
Yes Layton did well thanks to the folks in Quebec who have voted Liberal or BQ for the last twenty years and switched their vote to the NDP to punish those parties, they could not stomach going all the way over to the right.
The Liberals are in total disarray interesting listening to Bob Rae's comments last night certainly hinted to me that after only appealing to less than 19% of Canadians they were open to discussions (Code to merge with the NDP, remember where Rae started).
I turn on my TV this morning to see that in a huge surprise Ignatieff as resigned.
The NDP Jack Layton has it made for the next four years, big enough to be the opposition, in a position where he can stand up for every cause in the world, knowing full well that he will never have to deliver on anything. He will enjoy his four years as being Mr popular, but he needs to remember those 60% of his seats that came from the protest vote in Quebec will evaporate on him come next election when the Quebec voters see how ineffective he is.
The Bloc good riddance to a party that as spent twenty years saying to the rest of Canada give us what we want or we will leave.
The Green Party Elizabeth May, I was going to do a comment about whack jobs but thanks to her one seat the only thing she will achieve is being invited to the next debates.
The Conservatives, Stephen Harper I will admit not the most exciting or dynamic person in the world. But he was right the economy was and is the issue. You can be critical of his fiscal policies but I ask how much of that was driven by the fact he had to do that to keep the minority government in power.

Now the great debate begins about Harper ruling with 60% of Canadians opposed to him and his party. Well anybody that knows me knows I am a man of numbers. Since World War II Canada has gone through twenty two elections out of those the governing party as had 50% or more of the vote four times, twice with exactly 50% once with 50.1% and once with 53.7%. On the average the governing party as won with 42% of the vote and held 54% of the seats not much unlike this government who won with 39.6% of the vote and 54.2% of the seats.
Lets also not lose sight of the fact that of those 22 elections where the government was put in place 18 times with the minority support of the Canadian voters, eleven of those government were Liberal.
But the simple answer there was a time up until the end of World War I where governing parties on a regular basis had a majority of Canadian voters supporting them, up until that point Canada had similar to the USA a two party system. How is any party going to get a majority of votes with five parties running in the election the Bloc and the Greens took 10% of the vote between themselves then you have the three main parties to fight over 90% of the vote, maybe it will change if Mr Rae convinces the few Liberals that are left to merge with the NDP.
If the two left wing parties want to keep splitting their vote that's a decision they will have to make. Can you picture now the Liberal Democratic Party of Canada led by Jack Layton with Bob Rae as his loyal second in command.

Note: I assumed the largest majority of the people that read my blog live in Alberta. On my poll 67% of my readers voted for the Conservatives they received 67% of the vote in Alberta?. Surprisingly I did not realize I had a bit of a following in Quebec, 15% of the people that participated in my poll choose the BQ a little bit of the mark considering they only received 5% of the vote.

Better understanding Municipal Taxes in the Crowsnest Pass

2011-04-27T12:39:00.000-07:00

Its amazing how politicians positions change before and after an election!

During the campaign there was several candidates that stated they would not support a tax increase, one candidate stated on his literature that he would never support a tax increase, another stated that he would vote as close as possible to zero.

Then the first budget comes along and to our surprise it includes a tax increase, yes I sat in those council meeting and there was three people that voted against that increase but to his credit (Saindon) was the only one that spoke against it, very easy to vote against something and not say a word because its going through anyway.

Now the heat turns up a little bit because there was a tax increase, and because of the wonderful part of the equation called market assessment I have heard of some people being as high as 10%.

Then as I have raised a number of times we all know that during the budget process a number of new positions were created, with the old trick of building in the wages for 12 months knowing full well that the budget does not get passed before April, they are just filling those jobs now so there was at least four months of wages not used, the Foreman's job is still being advertised so that is not going to be filled for at least two more months.

So now the politicians are blaming the province for a tax increase, due to the ASFF and the Seniors Housing increasing their requisitions. Well everybody that been on or around council knows that happens every year. Councilor Mitchell saw that the last three years, I stressed during the election that it was important to have some experienced councilors on the next council for this very type of reason. But one of the present councilors basically stated that, that was nonsense experience was not such a important factor.

Never the less when the ASFF went up by $175,000 and the seniors went up by $18,000 the council had an option they could have taken the dollars saved on wages above and offset those increases, they choice to on the seniors side which will save the average tax payer a whopping $5 this year. But the real issue the ASFF they choose to ignore.

Anyway back to the tax increase they wish to now say the dollars they pick up from Joe Blow taxpayer did not increase this year that its all the provinces (ASFF) fault, its their portion that went up.

Well lets give them some slack here and compare apples to apples lets look at the number of dollars raised by General Municipal Taxation lets put aside the ASFF and the Seniors housing. Where do we find that information? Go to the Mill rate bylaw on the municipal web site. Below is an example from 2009 Bylaw 777 under the whereas you will see a line like the one below it shows the amount of dollars collected by General Municipal Taxation.

"Example 2009 Bylaw 777
WHEREAS, the estimated municipal revenues and transfers from all sources other than taxation is

estimated at $14,354,981, and the balance of $6,360,015 is to be raised by general municipal taxation;

In 2008 the number was $6,277,689
In 2009 the number was $6,360,015
In 2010 the number was $6,432,821
In 2011 the number is $6,555,990

So lets do the math 2009 increased by $82,326.
2010 increased by $72,806.
2011 increased by $123,169

Wow the general taxation went up this year by almost $50,000 more than the previous year, I hope we don't see zero tax increases like this every year. Based on the above numbers previous council did not do so bad.

Then other questions come up, a lot of which have already been pointed out by the commenter's on my blog.
Despite only increasing general taxation last year by $72,806 council managed to do the following:
$450,000 back into reserves
$350,000 surplus
$250,000 equipment purchase out of the municipal budget.

This year despite increasing general taxation by a whopping $123,169 council will manage to do the following:
$100,000 into reserves
Virtually zero surplus except what will be created by putting all those new wages in the budget that will only be used for a portion of the year.
$530,000 in debt taken on to purchase new equipment.

One last point I have heard comments being thrown around regarding reserves and the way they were previously and abused, I have stated before I did not always agree with every Infrastructure project the municipality did, but I would challenge any of the present council to point out a project we should not have spent those reserves on which projects were unnecessary.

Municipal Reserves the sequel.

2011-04-25T12:13:00.000-07:00

It is with great interest today that I read Councilor Gallants blog regarding the issue of Municipal Reserves. It makes me very excited to see that one councilor is obviously not going to lose focus on this very important issue, my only hope is that the policy for this issue is dealt with a little faster than the advertising policy. It is now been almost six months since that issue was raised at council and the policy is still not in place. I would hope something as important as the “municipal reserve policy” would not be tangled up so long that it would not be in place for the next budget.

Councilor Gallant comments to the use of reserves as a slush fund by previous councils I guess that resonates well with an audience over a couple of latte’s but the truth is a little bit different than that. I did not always agree with some of the previous council’s decisions on infrastructure, but over the last nine years, the $1.9 million that was taken out of reserves was used in combination with various government grants to get us $30 million in Infrastructure projects completed.

But never the less I always was one Councilor (not the only one) to emphasize the importance of building reserves, that’s why last year the majority of Council agreed that it was time to start rebuilding the reserves, which led to a budget that required a $450,000 contribution to the reserve fund. I am happy to hear that thanks to the prudent financial decisions of the majority of that previous council that there appears to be a $350,000 surplus for 2010. Some may not see that as much of an achievement but looking back over the last 10 years most Irwin led councils ran in the red.

Anyway, the issue of reserves how do you know what is enough. Well first thing I do is compare ourselves to other municipalities they can’t all be wrong, where do you find that information Municipal Affairs, their most recent figures to the end of 2008.

Reviewing 108 towns in the province with a population of 441,647, those towns had reserves between them of $474,622,492 or in simple terms $1075 per person, how does the Pass compare to that? $231 per person.

Should plans be in place for reserves? Absolutely (I caught the comment about lack of planning) but anybody who predicted eight years ago that there was going to be a recession in 2007 for a couple of years and that the federal/provincial governments were going to come forth with a stimulus program for municipalities, I want that individual picking numbers for me for Wednesday night.

Also, keep in mind every year previous councils were provided by administration both long term Infrastructure and equipment replacement programs. Did we always get sound advice, well its not that long ago administration was leading down the path of building a new town shop in Coleman that started out as a $300,000 venture, three years later it was up to $1.3 million if the majority of council had not saw fit to put a stop to that you would have no reserves today. The only point of that statement is to state that long-term plans are only as good as the information being provided to you.

Should taxes be raised to build reserves? Previous council managed to place $450,000 into reserves, and create a $350,000 surplus by increasing taxes 3.2% (Including ASFF and Seniors Housing) this year taxes including those outside requisitions went up 2% not a whole lot of difference 1.2% to be exact which in dollar terms is roughly a difference of only $80,000. However, the only money that was placed into reserves was the $100,000 for the lodge, versus the $450,000 put aside last year.

Let us also not lose sight of the requirement to borrow $530,000 to purchase new equipment this year.

Now let us talk about the issue of needs for reserves how much money should be put aside? I agree with Councilor Gallant the municipality does need to determine what the needs are for the long term. To this end, and yes I know it is only preliminary at this point but Myron Thompson the Director of Public Works reviewed with council a few meetings back the long term Infrastructure plan and the equipment replacement program. He stated that the municipality would need to put aside $430,000 per year for infrastructure and $410,000 for equipment replacement Add that to the $100,000 a year for the lodge gives you a total of $940,000 per year.

How will that amount be raised? If that number is even remotely close that equates to a tax increase of 14% next year (remember that would not include ASFF or Seniors Housing). At this point, nobody as even spoke about putting aside dollars for new recreation facilities. Wow, there better be many inefficiencies out there.

One more thought on the issue of policy, I keep hearing the need for policy because councils and administrations change every few years. I recognize also the importance of policy but let us not lose sight of the cold hard facts on policy. As this council spends a lot of time and energy on creating policy, first, it is only as good as the people enforcing it and second it can be changed by the political whims of future council just as quickly as it can be created.

Council Meeting April 19 2011

2011-04-20T04:14:00.000-07:00

Adoption of Agenda

Councilor Gallant added a Land under In Camera
Mayor Decoux also requested that the Delegation be moved to Land In Camera
Motion to accept agenda as amended passed Unanimously

Adoption of previous minutes

Minutes of the regular meeting of April 5, 2011, passed unanimously

Delegations

Shane Stewart development discussion, originally scheduled here council moved In camera

Administrative and Agency Reports: None

Business Arising from the minutes:
1. Budget Appropriation to accommodate the 10% increase in the 2011 Senior Housing Requisition.
Reductions in spending in various areas to offset the $18,500 in additional requisition to finance the seniors housing.

Correspondence:
1. Letter from Hon Hector Goudreau regarding Municipal consultation process, after reaching consensus that it did not really answer councils concerns Motion to file the letter as information passed unanimously
2. Letter from John Pundyk requesting that council look at the possibility of putting in place a moratorium on off site levies for the next fifty homes built in the Crowsnest Pass. Council agreed to table this until the next meeting. To allow administration to come back with information on the issue.

Committee Reports
1. Minutes of the March 29 G+P meeting motion to accept passed unanimously
2. Minutes of the March 8 G+P meeting motion to accept passed unanimously
3. Minutes of the March 10 Heritage Board meeting motion to accept passed unanimously. Councilor Londsbury also made a motion to approach Community Futures to request a copy of their list of historical buildings, passed unanimously.

Bylaws
1. Bylaw 826 Green Mountain Land Use Bylaw Amendment (First Readings)
This is to rezone land in west Coleman to build fourplexs, First reading passed unanimously

Notices of Motion: None

Other Business:
1. Endorsement Policy Councilor Mitchell brought forth a Motion to rescind this policy, Councilor Gallant spoke strongly in support of the policy, concern raised about the Mayor having the ability to welcome new businesses to the community. Councilor Mitchell moved to table his motion passed unanimously, Councilor Londsbury moved to send it to the policy committee passed unanimously.
2. Community Services Website, Administration brought forth the idea of creating a web site for the Community Services department, Councilors spoke about wanting to look at the entire municipal web site, also to look at the possibility of doing something in conjunction with the recommendations of the Economic Task Force, Councilor Saje felt that the report will be looking at the issue of branding the community. Motion to accept Administrations recommendation was defeated 2-5 with Councilors Londsbury and Mitchell in support.
3. Snow and Ice Control Policy, No suggestions from the public were received, Motion to accept the policy as presented was passed unanimously.
4. Temporary Road Closure Request for Bellevue passed unanimously.
5. Encroachment Agreement, Councilors Saje and Saindon asked to be excused due to reasons of conflict. Motion to accept was passed unanimously by remaining members of council.
6. Boulevard Parking, this issue was brought forth by a member of the public previously, requesting the community standards bylaw be amended to allow this. Councilor Saindon made it very clear that people did not want to be seeing other peoples garbage on their boulevard and strongly felt the bylaw was good and clear and its time for the municipality to enforce it, Councilor Gail agreed very much with that position, a motion was made to Maintain and enforce Bylaw 798, 2010 as passed by the previous council this was supported unanimously.
7. Municipal Historical Resource Designation Process, Motion to accept the process was passed unanimously, a request to meet with the group was tabled until September which also passed unanimously.
8. Approval of the request for the Orpheum Theatre as a Municipal Historical Resource and Notice to designate, was passed unanimously.
9. Appointments to the Crowsnest Pass Library Board, Motion to accept administrations recommendations passed unanimously.
10, Cancellation of the April 26 G+P meeting motion to cancel passed unanimously.

Council Member Reports:
Of note Councilor Saje made the comment that council should expect to see a Notice of Motion coming shortly on renovating the Elks Hall
Mayor Decoux informed council that the Province had reduced substantially funding to the South west Rockies organization
Councilor Gail spoke about a publication called 13 ways to kill a community, highly recommended it and after reading it realized he himself was guilty of doing many things in the book.

Public Input:
John Pundyk spoke about development concerns, felt that due to a previous bad experience with developers that the community as to be careful in the development of future policy in that in a desire to do the right thing it does not create policy that as the opposite effect of pushing away development.

Motion to go into Camera passed unanimously.

Site of Interest

2011-04-19T11:40:00.000-07:00

Under interesting site I have changed the address for the Discover Crowsnest Heritage site.
You can access this groups newsletters. Plus a ton more information, pay special attention to the links there are all kinds of good stuff you can check out.

Tax Notices are in your mail boxes

2011-04-18T14:58:00.001-07:00

They are in the mail boxes today.
Curious to see how other folks did, my taxes went up almost 2% looking forward to any comments.

Bridgecreek Video

2011-04-14T14:54:00.000-07:00

http://crowsnestpasshome.blogspot.com/2010/10/bridgecreekpromovideo2007-copy.html

If you can't stomach the whole video the former Mayor kicks in at the 5 minute mark
CAN YOU LET ME KNOW IF THIS WAS THE SAME ONE USED AT THE SALES SEMINARS?

Crowsnest Pass Doctor speaks out (Dr Garbutt)

2011-04-14T14:25:00.000-07:00

My fellow blogger John Prince beat me to this story, but I think the more people that get this story out the better.

Crowsnest Pass doctor feared lawsuit after criticizing health system

Read more:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/jobs/Crowsnest+Pass+doctor+feared+lawsuit+after+criticizing+health+system/4611678/story.html

Stelmach and his group are going to be the end of the Conservatives in Alberta, Danielle Smith must be getting very excited about an election.

Shocked in the Crowsnest Pass

2011-04-13T14:54:00.000-07:00

Why am I shocked? Well after all this community went through with the promises of Billion dollar projects, and all the glitz and glamour that came with them.

Last night at the G+P meeting Councilor Mitchell brought forth the following Notice of Motion.

“Whereas the council of the Mun of Crowsnest Pass passed a policy motion CL.013 in the fall of 2010, regarding endorsement policy for member of the council.
And whereas this policy may affect the goodwill of the community towards new endeavours of commercial or industrial ventures and instill the feelings that the community wishes to discourage new development.
And whereas this type of policy is covered under the Mun. Government Act in sections 172 and 173 (pecuniary interests) as quoted when this policy was brought forward in 2010.
With the above in mind, I Larry Mitchell, councilor of the Mun. of Crowsnest Pass will move or cause to be moved a motion to rescind this policy CL.013 2010 at our regular council meeting on April 19,2011.”

This policy came about because the former Mayor of the Crowsnest Pass appeared in a promotional video for a developer that created a lot of noise in the area over the last five years.

Councilor Mitchell understands as full well as I do that sections 172 and 173 of the MGA refers to pecuniary interests, (which in lay mans terms means no member of council shall participate in any council duty that they may gain financially from personally). That’s why we had a councilor for eighteen months who left the chambers every time an issue with this company came up, because he did have a pecuniary interest. He collected a paycheck from this company.

When this policy came forth it was explained in great detail to Councilor Mitchell that there was a perception real or not that when a municipal politician appears in a developers promotional material, it lends credibility to that project.

Nobody wants to discourage new ventures and it may be appropriate at some point for the community and its leaders to assist in the promotion of new development, marketing plan, economical initiative etc.

But prior to our Mayor appearing in this video was there a discussion in council? No

Was council as a whole given the opportunity to discuss if this was a good idea? No.

Now this is what the policy states “No member of council shall be permitted to endorse any project, appear in any promotional video, pamphlet, or publication of any type, or attend shareholders meetings acting as a member of Council without first presenting to Council the reasons for such involvement and receiving Council’s approval”

SHOCKING isn’t it? in simply terms it states that for a member of council to do this he/she would have to bring it to council first and receive approval. As a member of the council at that time I found out about this video months after it was released when a local real estate agent emailed it to me.

I would like to hear Councillor Mitchell or any other politician explain to the public how this policy, “discourages new development”

Teck/Elkview reach deal with Steelworkers

2011-04-07T15:58:00.000-07:00

Latest update

Membership of USWA 9346 voted 58.7% in favour of accepting the latest agreement.

612 Ballots cast

359 In favour

252 Opposed

1 spoiled

Tax Increase and Spring Cleanup

2011-04-07T15:40:00.000-07:00

Here is the best answer to "Is the municipality going to be collecting more taxes than it did last year"

2010

General Municipal Taxation $6,432,821
ASFF------------------------$2,366,925
Seniors Housing------------$   184,542

Total-----------------------$8,984,288

2011

General Municipal Taxation $6,555,990
ASFF------------------------$2,542,134
Seniors Housing------------$   184,542

Total-----------------------$9,282,666

An Increase of $298,378 or 3.3% that's not 0%

Spring Cleanup

Will now be called "Large Item Residential Pickup"
Taxpayers that meet the following criteria will be provided with this service.
Sixty five (65) years or older and those with disabilities (This was not defined at this point)
Will have three items to be picked up.
You will be required to go into the Municipal Office between May 9 to May 20th, you will be required to specify the three items you are having picked up.
Items will be picked up between May 24 to June 3.

2011 Tax Increase, Surprising twist

2011-04-07T11:52:00.000-07:00

Well taxes are not going up as much as we were led to believe at the first reading of the 2011 millrate.

As I pointed out in a previous post there was an avenue available to council to decrease the impact of the ASFF and the Seniors requisition.
http://crowsnestpasshome.blogspot.com/2011/03/tax-increase-maybe-not.html

The new positions that this Council felt were very necessary and saw fit to approve, based on the fact that none of those positions have been filled yet it produced some spare dollars in the budget. Which I had argued should be used to offset the additional taxation burdens placed on our residents.
On Tuesday night the majority of council partially agreed by using those budgetted dollars to offset the increased requirements of the senior board.
Councilor Saindon brought forth a motion to have the $100,000 capital requisition for the York Creek lodge and the $18,454 taken out of the operational budget, instead of increasing the tax burden on the residents.
He used my same arguement that there should be dollars available in the budget from the jobs not being filled yet.
Surprisingly despite there being no disagreement to that statement by administration or any of council, three members of council voted against it (Mayor Decoux, Councilors Londsbury and Mitchell) the question that only they can answer is why?

Council Meeting of April 5, 2011

2011-04-07T09:37:00.000-07:00

Council Meeting of April 5, 2011

Adoption of Agenda:

Mayor Decoux requested that Item #3 under other business (Flooding Concern-Crowsnest River) be moved to In Camera
Motion to accept the Agenda as amended was passed unanimously

Adoption of previous minutes:
Minutes of the Council Meeting of March 15,2011, Motion to accept was passed unanimously
Minutes of the Special Council Meeting of March 29,2011, Motion to accept was passed unanimously

Delegations: None

Administrative and Agency Reports: None

Business arising from the Minutes:
1. Oldman Watershed Council Update, Motion was made to send a Councilor to the meeting in June passed unanimously.

Correspondence:
1. Letter from Hon. Hector Goudreau regarding 2011 MSI minimum Threshold, Motion to accept passed unanimously
2. Letter from Hon. Hector Goudreau regarding payment of $180,000 for the ski hill groomer. Motion to accept passed unanimously
3. Letter from Hon. Luke Ouellette regarding Transportation Grant programs Motion to accept passed unanimously
4. Letter from Hon Ron Liepert in response to Councils request to define critical transmission Infrastructure Projects, council felt their questions were not answered so a Motion was made to table until public hearing are held on this issue motion passed unanimously
5. Volunteer Recognition Dinner. Councilor Saje requested information on a Volunteer database; administration informed that Cam Mertz would be bringing this information forward shortly. Motion to accept this was passed unanimously.

Committee Reports:
1. Minutes of January 10, 2011 Protective Services Committee, Motion to accept passed unanimously.
2. Minutes of January 14, 2011 Municipal Heritage Board, Motion to accept passed unanimously.
3. Minutes of February 23, 2011 Subdivision and Development Authority, Motion to accept passed unanimously.

Bylaws:
1. Bylaw 819, Short term borrowing 2nd and 3rd reading. ($530,000 to purchase new equipment) second reading passed unanimously, third reading passed unanimously.
2. Bylaw 820, Millrate Bylaw 2nd and 3rd reading. At the 2nd reading Councilor Saindon brought forth a motion to have the $100,000 requisition for the Senior’s Housing Capital Upgrade and the $18,454 increase in the operating costs for the Seniors Housing to be absorbed by the 2011 municipal operating budget.
This reading was passed by a vote of 4-3 with Mayor Decoux, Councilors Londsbury and Mitchell opposed.
Third reading was passed by a vote of 5-2 with Councilors Gallant and Mitchell opposed.
3. Bylaw 822, Operating Line of Credit 2nd and 3rd reading. Second reading was passed unanimously, third reading also passed unanimously.

Notices of Motion:
1. Way-finding Signage, Motion to bring back to council on September 13,2011 passed unanimously
2. Visitor Welcome Kiosks, Motion to bring back to council on September 13,2011 passed unanimously

Other Business:
1. Chamber of Commerce Trade Show May 6-7, Councilors volunteered to attend the show, Motion to accept passed unanimously
2. Policy Committee Terms of Reference, Motion to accept with minimal changes passed unanimously
3. Japan Earthquake and Tsunami and the Crowsnest Pass Connection, Motion to send a letter of support to the City of Hokuto, to match up to $2500 the fundraising done by the high school, and to work on the sister city agreement, passed unanimously
4. Large Item Equipment Pickup (Spring Cleanup) Councilor Saindon brought forth a motion to rescind the previous spring cleanup and that the municipal not spend any funds to clean up resident’s properties. This motion was defeated 6-1 with only Councilor Saindon supporting it. A further motion was made to rescind the previous Spring Cleanup this was passed by a vote of 6-1 (Saindon opposed)
A further motion to accept administrations recommendation to proceed with a three-item cleanup for residents 65 and over and those with disabilities. In addition, to bring back a report with all the costs provided prior to the 2012 budget. Was passed by a vote of 6-1 (Saindon opposed).

Council Member reports: None

Public Input: None

Motion to go In Camera: Passed Unanimously

Reading from the same script, where have we heard this story before?

2011-04-04T10:06:00.000-07:00

The following article appeared in the Desert Sun-Palm Springs April 4, 2008.

Villa Resort will be bigger and will look much different by May

The Cathedral City Sun

The Villa Resort in Cathedral City, which has new owners, is going through extensive renovations and an expansion.

Two Canadians, Bill Bradley and Colin Becker, won the property in an Oct. 2 auction for $4.7 million, according to Braun Co., the agent and listing broker.

The name Villa Resort stays, but those familiar with the compound will find it very different come May. It is expected to reopen for business by then.

In an interview with the Cathedral City Sun, Mark Van Laanen, one of two business partners joining the new owners, revealed new plans for the storied vacation spot at 67670 Carey Road.

The compound - which boasts 45 rooms, two bars, a pool, Jacuzzi, restaurant and lounge, fitness center, fully equipped kitchen, and more - was on the market for nearly a year before its owners put it up for auction.

Van Laanen, a Wisconsin native and restaurateur of 28 years, said two more pools will be added and at least 100 more condominiums as time shares.

QUESTION: What was your motivation for going into business at the Villa Resort?

ANSWER: It was Bill and Colin's idea to do a total remake. It caught my attention and I said, "Let's talk." There's major reconstruction going on at the property, and we're trying to go as green as possible to keep it environmentally friendly.

It's actually a very exciting project and we're going to town on it right now. It's going to be a lot more upscale than what the property was.

What can lodgers expect to see at the property?

It's going to be a clean, well-manicured place. It will be a very high energy place with an eclectic menu. I did European country food and it will have that edge with a California twist.

What are your long-term goals?

To get the whole property developed. Condos, a luxurious upscale spa, poolside dining, cocktails by the pool. Just to watch this whole area be developed and grow.

What is planned for the lots next door that the Villa Resort has acquired?

Fractional condominiums will be built. The hedges behind us will be ripped down and that will open the property up. We will be putting in pools with the condos being built.

For years the resort has been associated with gay tourism. Will it still serve that enclave or target a new demographic?

We're shooting for all demographics, regardless of gay or straight. We don't want it to be exclusively a gay resort. It will be comfortable for everyone to come. We're going to be advertising in all venues.

The compound - which boasts 45 rooms, two bars, a pool, Jacuzzi, restaurant and lounge, fitness center, fully equipped kitchen, and more - was on the market for nearly a year before its owners put it up for auction.

The following article appeared in the Desert Sun-Palm Springs Sept 7, 2009.

Villa Resort owner sees new life for site

The Desert Sun

The owner of the former Villa Resort in Cathedral City says he intends to seek financing next week to expand and transform the site into a luxury hotspot.

Bridgecreek Development owner Bill Bradley of Calgary, Alberta, Canada said the now-dilapidated, two-and-a-half-acre site on a short street behind Target Stores will expand to seven and a half acres after purchasing adjacent land. The resort is to be renamed Resort Blue Palm Springs and would offer 240 luxury units, three pools and spas, two tennis courts and an entertainment venue.

"We now have a plan in place to seek project financing to continue developing the site that will cost more than $30 million," Bradley said.

His plan to continue the development comes despite a long delay in construction.

Bradley purchased the site in a bankruptcy auction in October 2007 with grand plans to transform the property at 67-670 Carey Road.

But he got off to a shaky start by spring 2008, when Cathedral City officials halted work at the site, citing a lack of permits.

"Regarding the contractors, that is really the business of the developer, but we did indeed stop construction and gave them the information on what they needed to do to obtain the appropriate permits," said Cathedral City spokesman Allen Howe.

Howe said an interior demolition permit was taken out in August 2008 but contractors never acted on it.

The economic downturn further delayed the project, Bradley said.

"Here we are sitting on seven and a half acres and the economy isn't good," Bradley said. He said his company committed $10 million of its own money to buy the land and hire contractors. The project's delay was not attributed to a loss of financing, he said.

"The only funding we put in was our own private investment and we have not lost any funding," Bradley said.

Bradley anticipates resuming construction next year, with the resort opening in 2011.

Villa Resort timeline

October 2007: Bridgecreek Development of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, purchased the resort for $4.7 million with plans to expand and rename the site Resort Blue Palm Springs.

October 2003: Bob Grinchuk and Reuel Olin of San Diego purchased the resort for $2 million as an anniversary gift. The couple invested $3.5 million into renovations. The resort was billed as the "finest full-service gay resort in the world."

1951: The Elizabeth Arden Corp. turned the resort into a beauty farm.

Late 1850s: The site was a Butterfield Overland Stagecoach stop

The resort is to be renamed Resort Blue Palm Springs and would offer 240 luxury units, three pools and spas, two tennis courts and an entertainment venue.

This appeared Sept 11-2009 in the same paper

Resort owner to start up construction again

After a long delay the owner of the former Villa Resort in Cathedral City planned to seek financing this week to expand and transform the site into a luxury hotspot.

Bridgecreek Development owner Bill Bradley of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, said the now-dilapidated, two-and-a-half-acre site on a short street behind Target Stores will expand to seven and a half acres after purchasing adjacent land. The resort is to be renamed Resort Blue Palm Springs and would offer 240 luxury units, three pools and spas, two tennis courts and an entertainment venue.

"We now have a plan in place to seek project financing to continue developing the site that will cost more than $30 million," Bradley said.

His plan to continue the development comes despite a long delay in construction.

Bradley purchased the site in a bankruptcy auction in October 2007 with grand plans to transform the property at 67-670 Carey Road.

But he got off to a shaky start by spring 2008, when Cathedral City officials halted work at the site, citing a lack of permits.

"Regarding the contractors, that is really the business of the developer, but we did indeed stop construction and gave them the information on what they needed to do to obtain the appropriate permits," said Cathedral City spokesman Allen Howe.

Howe said an interior demolition permit was taken out in August 2008 but contractors never acted on it.

The economic downturn further delayed the project, Bradley said.

"Here we are sitting on seven and a half acres and the economy isn't good," Bradley said. He said his company committed $10 million of its own money to buy the land and hire contractors. The project's delay was not attributed to a loss of financing, he said.

"The only funding we put in was our own private investment and we have not lost any funding," Bradley said.

Bradley anticipates resuming construction next year, with the resort opening in 2011.

The resort is to be renamed Resort Blue Palm Springs and would offer 240 luxury units, three pools and spas, two tennis courts and an entertainment venue.

New Blog of Interest

2011-04-04T09:45:00.000-07:00

Under my heading of Interesting Blog and Websites you will see a new listing, "The Miners Journey" which belongs to long time Pass resident Peter Rosner, this will give readers one more perspective on life in the Crowsnest Pass. Would be good for anybody that's got the time to check it out.

Note: Also under Interesting blogs you will not see "The Pass" any more that blog is now under the author's name "John Prince", like Peter above another long term resident of the Crowsnest Pass, please check out when you can

Pandora's Box is opened

2011-04-03T10:35:00.000-07:00

Coming Tuesday night on the Council Agenda is this years version of Spring Cleanup.
Support or oppose that's your choice but after the discussion of last week's G+P meeting nothing but confusion reigning now.
First of all Council and administration can't agree on the numbers for last year's cost administration brings forth a total of $66,000, Councilor Saindon who manages the Land fill and receives all of the cleanup materials believes the cost are in excess of $120,000 he claims it cost us $409 a tonne to bring that material in.
Next the debate turns to the issue of time frame, Administration claims nine days will be sufficient, some members of council are very skeptical to say the least. History in the last six years as shown cleanups takes anywhere up to six months.
Then we go back to cost for this year, administration is allowing $25,000 based on the nine days Councilor Saindon's math comes up with at least $35,000 who's right more confusion.
Now back to the debate on who gets garbage picked up, after much debate from the picking up of three items, to there is a private business that will pick it up, to the original intent was to help out people who can't get to the landfill themselves. (Who really remembers when, why or how this started)
The confusion (debate) seems to end with maybe we look at doing it or not doing it. Maybe we do it for the handicapped, maybe we do it for the elderly? those that are retired, maybe we do it for everybody for one more year.
Lets add to the confusion how does the municipality determine handicapped or the elderly?:
The handicapped would that be the municipality requiring you to provide a Doctor's note, would you have to be on AISH, maybe CPP Disability.
The elderly what criteria will be used, over 55, 60, 65?
Retired maybe that's the answer must one be on CPP because that can be anywhere from 60-70. I know residents that are in their late fifties and retired other residents that are in their late sixties and still working.

Maybe the municipality will look at income levels, qualify for the Alberta Seniors assistance you get three items picked up.

Then lets look at the numbers (2006 census) out of our population of 5745, the number of people over the age of 19 are 4615 of those 2115 are over 55. Assuming that another 5% of the adult population are on either AISH or CPP that's another 231 people add them together there is a total of 2346 or in simple terms 50% of our population.
If you are going to pick up 50% why would you not just do a 100%.

The point I am trying to make here is this whole (proposed) cleanup besides the confusion above is going to be a logistical nightmare, for two weeks the office is going to be inundated with phone calls. When you phone you have to book your three items, so as I stated previously the crew is coming up my street do they ignore the third house that didn't call but puts stuff out because everybody else is? What happens when they get to my neighbours house and see that he's put out a rocking chair, that was not on his list.
If we go with the route of only picking up the handicapped and the elderly will the municipality be expecting all of these good folks to becoming into the municipality to prove their eligibility? Wow

Maybe its time to take Councilor Londsbury approach, "we are all responsible for the mess we make maybe we should all be responsible for cleaning it up ourselves, there is a local business available that will take it away for you".

Teck/Elkview Latest Update

2011-04-02T13:43:00.000-07:00

UPDATE - Saturday, April 2, 2011 - 11:55am

•We just received a call from the Bargaining Committee in Vancouver. A TENTATIVE DEAL WAS REACHED EARLY THIS MORNING.

◦The Company and the Union Bargaining Committee's have agreed to recommend the Memorandum of Settlement.

◦The Memo of Settlement is subject to ratification by the Membership in a secret ballot vote no later than April 7, 2011.

◦There will be an information meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday this coming week. Time and place to be announced on Monday.

◦Voting will start Tuesday after the meeting and will be held Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. Ballots will be counted Thursday, April 7, 2011 after the polls close.

◦MONDAY'S SOLIDARITY MARCH HAS BEEN CANCELLED!!!!!!!!!!!

Bridgecreek

2011-04-01T09:27:00.000-07:00

I understand from a good source that May's edition of Alberta Venture Magazine will have an article on the Bridgecreek coming and goings in the Crowsnest Pass.

Special Council Meeting of March 29,2011

2011-03-30T14:27:00.000-07:00

Special Council Meeting of March 29,2011

Adoption of Agenda:
No additions
Motion to accept the Agenda was passed unanimously

Adoption of previous minutes: None

Delegations: None

Administrative and Agency Reports: None

Business arising from the Minutes: None

Correspondence: None

Committee Reports: None

Bylaws:

1. Bylaw 820, Mill rate Bylaw.
Director of Finance presented the mill rate bylaw provided information on the breakdown of the bylaw. Discussion began with the following questions and or comments: Does administration have a 5-year projection for linear assessment? Yes it going down
Are assessment values based on market values of June 2010? Yes
How does market values for June 2010 compare to values for June 2009? Pretty well the same.
Are power lines part of linear assessment? Yes
Is school foundation charged on just residential? No but our business sector is so small that the residential is hit with the brunt of any increase.
CPR did their assessment go up when they added the by pass line and upgraded their bridges? Administration to check on this, assessor believes it is based on tonnage that passes through.
Is there any change to the mill rate? No not the municipal portion
How much will tax rates increase? Administration stated on a commercial property worth $1.2 million $118 on a residential anywhere from $8-22.
Is our commercial high compared to other municipalities? Assessor explained that our ratio of non-residential to non-residential is 2-1, where Lethbridge is at 4-1 and Calgary is at 5-1.
Councilor Saindon requested where dollars from jobs not being filled and savings on equipment purchases were going. Administration explained that before those dollars were spent elsewhere information would come back to council.
Motion for first reading passed by a vote of 4-3 (Saje, Gallant, Saindon opposed)

2. Bylaw 823, Discharge of Septage into Municipal Owned Septage Disposable Facility.
Discussion: Mayor Decoux wanted to know why this was brought to a special meeting of council. Administration stated that it is a revenue issue needed to be implemented immediately.
Does this policy fit within the Municipal Environmental Sustainability Plan? Administration stated that this is a service that many municipalities provide we need to have it put in place. Motion to passed second reading passed unanimously. Motion to pass third reading passed unanimously.

Notices of Motion: None

Other Business:
1. Maplevue Hall Demolition: Discussion
Request for a 60-day extension on the demolition from the Crowsnest Heritage Board.
Felt that heritage board had many opportunities to approach council previously; it would not be fair on the contractor to delay now.
Felt that the heritage board should be more pro active and approach the municipality with a list of municipal owned building that they would like to have some input on.
Councilor Saje felt if the roof was good should give the heritage board the time to look at it.
Councilor Londsbury felt that the building is an eyesore and should be dealt with also concerned about the old Cameron school in West Coleman.
Motion to proceed with the demolition passed 6-1 (Saje opposed)

G + P Meeting March 29, 2011

2011-03-30T13:42:00.000-07:00

G + P Meeting March 29, 2011

Adoption of Agenda:
Councilor Saje added Personnel In Camera
Councilor Saindon added two Land Issues In Camera
Motion to accept agenda with additions passed unanimously

Delegations:

1. Scott Warris, Treasurer-Crowsnest Boys and Girls Club

Presented a lot of information on what the Boys and Girls club have done over the last year. Spoke to the support they have received from the community. Requested that council support them as they attempt to raise $70,000 this spring.

2. Carrie Bahr-Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami.

Spoke about the cultural exchange program with Hokuto City in Japan, she also raised with council that the high school is doing a fund raiser today (March 30) to assist in helping the Japanese recovery. She asked for council to match the funds raised. She also requested that council look into the possibility of becoming a sister city with Hokuto.

Topics for Discussion:

1. Policy Committee Terms of Reference:

Two year term for councilors,
Invitation to other people that can be drawn on for resource information needs to be more strongly worded.
Quorum should be three people two of which must be council members.
Canadian spelling of councilor should have two “l”
Should be an opportunity for public input into significant policies.
CAO stated that the policy could be posted on the municipality web site.
Motion to have administration bring back the policy passed Unanimously.

2. Large item Residential Pickup:

Request from administration to rescind the previous spring cleanup policy.
The mayor asked how and when did the program begin.
Administration stated that it originally began to clean up the community and provide a service for residents who could not get to the landfill.
Is there a limit on household furniture and appliances?
Councilor Saindon questioned the costs of last years cleanup, administration stated it was $66,000 by his calculations he came up with in excess of $120,000.
He also questioned this years budget number felt that doing the cleanup in nine days was optimistic. Felt the municipality could look at the option of contracting out the service.
Most of council felt administration should look at providing the services for the elderly and the handicapped.
Councilor Gail also agree with providing the service for the older folks but realizes that people have got to start looking at cutbacks.
Councilor Saindon asked that the municipality look at a different option, provide a loader, truck and two labours for two weeks and strategically located bins for 60 days.
Mayor Decoux felt that the public should be notified that this is the last year, or that the service will be changed and provided to a selected group, also that the public needs to understand that some services will be reduced or cut.

Motion was made to have administration bring this back to council with the input from councilors considered, Motion was passed 6-1 (Saindon opposed)

3. Equipment Replacement Policy

Motion was made to take this policy back to the Policy Committee on April 20 and bring back to the G+P meeting on April 26th. Passed Unanimously.

4. Snow Clearing and Ice Control Policy

Councilor Mitchell wanted to know how many graders the municipality has on the road, how many in Blairmore. He wants the public to know that we live in the mountains and that they can not expect to have bare pavement.
Councilor Londsbury wanted to know if the School zone definition refers to route or the area in around schools
Councilor Gail stated that there was seven bricks in the paper, felt that the papers needed to get the message out that public needs to have compassion and patience.
Councilor Gallant wanted to know if the policy was drawn up in consultation with the employees and if they were in agreement, Myron Thompson replied that the Leadhands agreed with most aspects but that there was some debate.
Councilor Saindon asked why graders were not running outside of regular hours.
Myron stated that a letter had been sent to the union requesting that double shifting being allowed on the graders for snow plowing, drainage issues etc, administration was waiting for a response.

Motion to recommended this policy to council passed unanimously.

Teck/Elkview latest update

2011-03-29T14:15:00.000-07:00

UPDATE - Tuesday, March 29, 2011 - 2:30pm

•TALKS TO RESUME FRIDAY in VANCOUVER!!!

◦The mediator - Mr. Vince Ready - contacted both parties this afternoon by way of letter requesting "that the parties return to the bargaining table for exploratory talks in an attempt to find a resolution to this protracted dispute."

◦The Company contacted our President, Chris Nand this afternoon stating that they will be in Vancouver on Friday to meet. Chris responded that he will be there with our bargaining committee.

Taxes are going up, Zero per cent tax Increase is fading away fast, who will step up to the plate? Anybody? Nobody?

2011-03-29T12:23:00.000-07:00

Zero per cent tax Increase, who will step up to the plate?. Somebody must if that is to become real.
Tonight March 29th there is a special council meeting, one of the agenda items is the (PROPOSED) Mill rate bylaw No.820 for 2011.

Last year in 2010 the Municipality collected $8,984,288 from the taxpayers of the Crowsnest Pass of which,

$6,432,821 was for general municipal taxation.
$2,366,925 was for the Alberta School Foundation Fund.
$ 184,542 was for the Seniors Housing.

The PROPOSED Bylaw for 2011 will collect $9,401,120

$6,555,990 for General Municipal Taxation
$2,542,134 for Alberta School Foundation Fund.
$ 302,996 for Seniors Housing

By my math that's an increase of 4.64%, which is a far cry from a ZERO per cent. An additional $416,832 is going to be collected by our local taxman.
Back to my original question who will step up to the plate to get this down to zero, remember any councilor can make amendments to the bylaw at any of the three readings.

The plan presented by administration calls for first reading tonight and second and third reading on April 5th.

Not a lot of time.

One Liberal's response to latest opinion poll

2011-03-25T11:15:00.000-07:00

Good article in today's Calgary Sun regarding the Ipsos opinion poll that came out yesterday.

http://warrenkinsella.com/2011/03/in-todays-sun-if-ipsos-is-right-is-it-1984-all-over-again/

March 24, 2011

Conservatives @ 43% up 3%
Liberals @ 24% down 3%
NDP @ 16% same
Bloc @ 10% same
Greens @ 6% up 1%

The last time there was a 19% lead going into an election was 1984 when Mulroney cleaned house, and the Liberals were left with 40 seats.

Does history always repeat itself?

Its amazing how one word can change the way people view an issue.

2011-03-24T12:42:00.000-07:00

On March 8, the Herald asked the following question:

“Do you support the municipality launching a shuttle bus service to transport Crowsnest Pass residents to indoor pool facilities in neighboring communities?”

The results out of 61 people that voted 49% said Yes, 44% said No and 7% were undecided.

Shortly after the Promoter ran a very similar question except they added that one little word “PAY” would you pay for that same shuttle?

The results were out of 51 people that voted 16% said Yes, 73% said No and 11% were undecided.

It really is amazing out that one-word “PAY” changes everything.

Think about it folks, even if they come up with corporate sponsors to cover the shuttle up front how long do you think that will last, within a year the taxpayers will be paying for a service that only a very small portion of the public will use.

The message that I heard from this poll and around town is we the taxpayers of the Crowsnest Pass do not want to pay for this service.

It's only garbage, Spring Cleanup in the Crowsnest Pass

2011-03-23T11:02:00.000-07:00

Well here, we go again the old issue of Spring Cleanup.

This annual ritual (some years bi annual) where we take our municipal workforce away from jobs that they should be doing and turn them into garbage men (nothing derogatory towards garbage men) for anywhere from two to six months.

Over the last seven years this absolute waste of time as cost the taxpayers anywhere from $100,000 to $400,000 per year in total somewhere around $2 million.

Wow, we could have put in place three new graders, three new loaders and probably a couple of brand new trucks without incurring one dollar of debt in that timeframe.

So new council made up of mostly people that pledged to go after the inefficiencies within the municipality to keep the cost of taxes down takes another look at this issue.

Lo and behold, they have come up with a new plan they are going to remain being one of the few communities in the province that still does this silliness but they are going to do it differently.

We the taxpayers are going to be supplied with a list of items that are eligible to be removed by our public works employees, (temporary garbage men). For two weeks, the taxpayers will have the opportunity to call the municipality to notify them of the need to have their garbage picked up.
Then the municipal employees will come around and pick them up. The dollars allowed in the budget for this Myron Thompson stated $10,000 just for labour.
My response to that is “dream on” at our labour rates that works out to a little under 300 hours of labour over a one month period that “two” employees assigned to this.

Think about a few things:

How hard is it going to be to call the municipal office those two weeks?
We have over 3200 residences in the Crowsnest Pass imagine if only half of them call for a pick up, the logistic nightmare of coordinating that exercise?.

If house number one and four on a block calls to schedule a pick up, number three sees his neighbors putting out material so he just goes ahead and puts his out will the municipal employees just drive by because he did not schedule?

Councilor Saindon stated I believe correctly that this cleanup will cost just as much as the old one. He as also stated on his blog that he is clearly opposed to this, I hope he can convince his colleagues, it is time for the Crowsnest Pass to recognize as so many other communities have this is not a luxury we can afford.

Its time to end the debate on Spring Cleanup.

NOTE: Surprising results on my poll regarding the new cleanup only 2 voters (5%) felt the new idea was good, 11 voters (30%) felt the municipality should stick with the old cleanup. Lastly 23 voters (63%) felt that the municipality doing cleanups should just end.

Tax Increase! Maybe Not.

2011-03-22T11:29:00.000-07:00

There seems to be some interest amongst our Council about maintaining the Status Quo on tax levels. In simple terms no increase, where does this come from check out Councilor’s Saindon Blog he states the following.

“Can we still have no tax tax increase this year? My answer to that is yes and your administration and council will work to that end. Certain budget adjustments and programs may feel a further pinch ,but I am confident we can find the extra needed to offset the school board and senior’s housing increases for this year.”

How will Council and administration pull this off?

Well let me say this, politicians and administrators will always find a good reason to spend our money, there is no shortage of worthy causes to help.
Through my previous experiences on council when you hear a politician or administrator tell you that the budget is as tight as it can be, there is no further room to cut don’t believe them.
There may be no further “political will” buts there’s always room, anybody that’s ever drawn up a budget knows that there’s always wiggle room built in.

Let me give you an example, the new jobs that were created. From what I heard from the budget process there was dollars placed into the budget for 10 months wages for a Public Works Foreman, the opportunity to apply for the job is open until March 25. Then there will be interviews, the person hired will probably need to give notice so realistically they will not start until June 1 at the earliest there’s three months wages probably $20,000.

The other positions were budgetted for a full year, none of those positions have been posted yet so there is at least three more months wages probably minimum $50,000.

The only problem with this approach is it gives a misleading dollar figure for wages moving forward, because next year the municipality will be faced with the cost for a full year.

Anyway that’s just my ideas on reaching a zero percent tax increase, but it will take more than that to offset the almost $200,000 increase in the ASFF and the Seniors foundation.

More than anything else it's about "political will"

Crowsnest Pass Council Meeting March 15, 2011

2011-03-18T10:54:00.000-07:00

Council Meeting of March 15,2011

Adoption of Agenda:

No additions
Motion to accept the Agenda was passed unanimously

Adoption of previous minutes.

1. Council meeting of March 1, 2011. Motion to accept the minutes was accepted unanimously.

Delegations: None

Administrative and Agency Reports:

CAO Clifford gave a verbal report that information on the Sawback Ridge development will be presented at the next Council Meeting

Director of Public Works Myron Thompson gave a verbal presentation on the issue of Spring Cleanup. Intention to start May 24th, Residents will be allowed to place out three items from a list of eligible items to be communicated prior. Residents will be expected to call the municipal office the two weeks prior to May 24th to book their pickup.

Councilors made the following comments:
Should the municipality look at picking large items up more than once a year.
Electronic recycling should also be done more than once a year
Fridges can be dropped of at Devlins any time of the year
Concern over the cost of this type of pickup being no cheaper than previous cleanups. Cleanup last year cost $442 per tonne, also Councilor Saindon stated that 80-90% of residents have the ability to take their own garbage to the landfill.

Business arising from the Minutes:

1.Outstanding Action Items from Motions of Council (2004-2010) Administration requested more time for this process, council granted until May 3

Correspondence: None

1. Hector Goudreau, Minister of Municipal Affairs-2011 MSI Funding municipality to receive approximately $1.9million from the province, $1.7 for capital and $200,000 for operational.

2. Hector Goudreau, Minister of Municipal Affairs-Clarification Letter sent to the wrong person a second time, Mayor Decoux asked administration to ensure this does not happen again.

3. Office of the Prime Minister-Receipt of Correspondence, Municipality had sent the Prime Ministers office a thank you letter, they sent the municipality a letter thanking them for thanking them.

Committee Reports:

1.Minutes of March 8, 2011 Goverance and Priorities Committee. Councilor Mitchell pointed out that the minutes stated that council members “will” attend the Mayors Prayer Breakfast it should have stated “may”. Motion to accept minutes as amended passed unanimously.

Bylaws:

1.Bylaw 819, Borrowing Bylaw-Grader & Hydraulic Excavator. At this point confusion set in, council started to question administration. Councilor Londsbury was surprised with the 5 year term he was under the impression that the items were to be paid off in this budget. Councilor Saje also stated that he knew the Municipality was doing short term financing but thought they would be paying it off in 3-4 months when the property tax dollars came in. Administration stated that it out been clearly shown in the budget that there would be a payment of $116,000 a year for the next five years. Mayor Decoux and several other councilors indicated that was there interpretation also. Motion to pass first reading passed unanimously.

2.Bylaw 822, Operating Line of Credit- authorizes the Municipality to borrow up to $1 million for an operating line. Motion to passed first reading passed unanimously

3.Bylaw 823, Discharge of Septage into Municipal Owned Septage Disposable Facility. Motion to passed first reading passed unanimously

Notices of Motion: None

Other Business:

1. Capital Equipment and Project Tendering update, this was a presentation by Myron Thompson relevant to the purchase of new equipment and the tendering process to demolish the Maplevue Hall. Motion to accept passed unanimously.

2. 10 Year Capital Infrastructure Plan, Continuation of Previous plans for Infrastructure, with the need for the Municipality to spend $42 milion over the next ten years. The major project being the upgrading of the Frank Sewer Plant, most of these costs will be covered by grants with the exception of approximately $430,000 a year which the municipality will have to provide, the Director of Public Works suggested that this amount should be placed in reserves each year for that purpose. Motion to accept passed unanimously.

3. Pinkest Town in the West. Motion to accept passed unanimously

4. Mayor’s Prayer Breakfast. Motion to accept passed unanimously

5. Reschedule the March 22 G+P meeting to March 29 if there is enough agenda items to deal with. Motion to accept passed unanimously

6. Volunteer Directory-Administration informed council that Director of Community Services will be bringing forth information on this to Council at a later date.

7.Community Enhancement-Mayor Decoux announced that he had been approached by Frank Loseth who as a group of volunteers that are ready and willing to help clean up the community, Mayor Decoux suggested that Mr Loseth be invited to a meeting of council to present his ideas.

Council Member reports: None

Public Input: Resident Joe Mahieux came to present to council his concerns about Bylaw 798 (Community Standards) specifically Part #3, Section 5. This bans the parking of Campers, Trailers etc on municipal boulevards. Asked that council take another look at this, which they agreed to and stated they would respond to him in a timely fashion.

Motion to go In Camera: Passed Unanimously

Councilors not clear on increasing Municipal debt load? Do we really know what's going on?

2011-03-17T08:06:00.000-07:00

Imagine going through a budget process, then two months later Two councilors indicate that they didn't realize the Municipality was assuming over half a million dollars in term debt.

More exciting news a new approach to Spring Cleanup????

Will my taxes really be going up?

And how to make yourself look good with a surplus

More to follow......