Andrew Saje raising the issues-Public Relations

Further issues raised by Councilor Saje’s letter, after having already spoken about the Agenda Committee and who (Bruce/Myron) controls council’s agenda.  

Let’s talk about the G+P meeting of December 18, on the advertised agenda for that meeting was one issue posted In Camera, Personnel in the released minutes for that meeting was added a further In Camera issue Legal.

During that In Camera session according to Councilor Saje’s letter the issue of Public Relations came up and the hiring of Victor Tanti from Calder Bateman the argument was made later that council did not need to vote on this issue because it would be covered by the “advertising budget”.

If you accept the advertising budget argument is justified why would this “advertising” even be brought to council? Following that line of reasoning will other advertising that falls under the budget be brought forth In Camera as either a Personnel or Legal issue for council “opinion”.   

Next can anybody tell us which category advertising would fall into Personnel, or Legal?

I agree with Councilor Saje if this was such a routine issue why not bring it up in a regular meeting?

I agree again with Councilor Saje especially after the number of consultants that have cashed a Municipality of Crowsnest Pass cheque over the last thirty months “hiring another consulting firm should not be routine”

Many more questions are created by the release of Councilor Saje’s letter.

Should the public be concerned about Council doing business in this fashion? Was this the only issue dealt with in this fashion? Why did Council feel the need to hire a Public Relations Consulting Firm? Is Councilor Saje’s letter a full accounting of all of his concerns? Are there more concerns?

        

Want to see your new Public Relations Consultant Victor Tanti check him out at the following address:

http://www.calderbateman.com/staff/victor-tanti/

Municipal Spending-Ratepayers Petition-Ignoring the Numbers

Well a whole smorgasbord of comments I am hearing this week in the Crowsnest Pass on my blog, around town regarding the ongoing issues in our community. First of all how many people were impressed with the Municipal advertising, I was flabbergasted,  the costs between both papers and the radio I suspect they were in the range of $8-10,000 of our taxpayers money spent on this blitz of information. I was surprised the initial reaction I have gotten from the people that I have spoken to was one of either, did not read it and do not care what it said, or couldn’t understand it.  

What amazed me more than the fact that we had $10,000 of spare money available was the response time of the municipality?

The ratepayer’s flyer hit the paper on Tuesday; I believe the papers go to press by the weekend. So in three days that package was put together approved by Council, (my impression was that it came from council and administration so I’m sure all of that team had their input and at least a majority supported this document).

That timing is incredible when you look at the context of other requests for information personally I requested information on the amount of dollars spent on Consultants it took me three months to get that information. The ratepayers requested a lot of the information that was released this week back on August 2, did not receive it until October 9. The one the public is waiting for the Rum Runner Days financial report, the event took place on the weekend of July 19, now everybody understands that it takes a few weeks for the bills to roll in and sort everything out. So I do not think anybody would have been bothered having to wait until the end of August. But folks it’s now not being released until Nov 6, and what’s made it look even worse is, its been on the Council agenda three times and three times its been deferred. Everybody understands the sensitivity of this issue so why would you do that?

The Petition last night it was announced at the Ratepayers meeting that they have close to 2100 signatures on the petition, with 30 plus people out in the community still signing names. It is not unrealistic to think that the final number could be in the range of 2500. Now keep in mind tonight Oct 25 will be two weeks since the petition started, we have a population of 5565 (2011 census) of which 855 are under the age of 18. So that means out of a potential 4710 voters 45% have signed a petition in “two weeks”, municipal, provincial even federal, elections are lucky if they get that kind of turnout after a two-month election campaign, with polling stations in place.

The message here should be not “that people are getting led down the garden path with mis-information” that argument could be made about every candidate that has run in every election campaign in the history of politics. The message that should be coming out of this process unless you have totally lost touch with the public is that something is seriously wrong here, unless of course the leadership here just chooses to totally ignore the numbers.

Yes, we all understand that the public voted for change in 2010, and change does need to and will happen. Look at what as transpired over the last little while, not just the petition, volunteers do we have any left, in yesterday’s paper there was at least eight boards listed that are short of members despite being advertised for months. The issue with the Firemen is there one person out there that felt that was handled well. The swimming pool society, the Bellevue Library.  Obviously, the public is not buying into what has been happening in our community.

    

G + P Meeting October 25, 2011

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.

Update on municipal advertising (Crowsnest Pass)

Note: Council Meeting of Dec 21,2010.
After reviewing my notes I realized I missed some critical information on the advertising issue.

During the discussion on the draft advertising policy Lynne Cox the Director of Legislative services and Human Resources. Mentioned that the dollars in the proposed budget for advertising presented to council were based on providing one page of advertising in each paper at the rates set forth in the present contract $180 per page.
She also stated that she only had one quote from a local paper at that point, that would provide advertising at a 30% reduction of their regular rates.
The last time I checked the local papers were charging somewhere between $7-800 per full page at a 30% discount that would put them somewhere between $490-$560 per page. At a minimum a 270% increase over what the municipality is presently paying and then double it, based on duplicating the advertising in two papers.

Crowsnest Council Meeting Nov 9th, 2010 (G+P)

Tuesday November 9, 2010 Governance and Priorities Committee Meeting

Please keep in mind this is the G+P meeting so even though much debate takes place the issues dealt with at these meeting here will be moved forward as recommendations to the Council meeting

Adoption of Agenda
Motion to accept carried unanimously.

Delegations-None

Topics for Discussions

1. Waiver of Arena Ice Fees-This was minor hockey’s request to waive ice fees for the provincial pee wee tournament in late March, if successfully awarded to the Pass the fees will be waived for that weekend (approx $2800) and Minor Hockey in return will donate to the cost of netting for the Complex ($ amount not presented). Passed Unanimously Recommend to Council
2. Advertising Review-Debate took place on better communicating with the public, the cost of doing business, etc etc. Decision was made to go back to advertising in both papers, and for administration to come back with a policy that covers all communications with various types of media. Passed Unanimously Recommend to Council
3. Dates for Orientation with Administration November 30, and Facility Tour Dec 1st.
4. Travel Alberta Open House-Council decided to have Councilor Gallant attend. Passed Unanimously Recommend to Council
5. Ball Soccer Complex Request-Administration brought forth a bill due for the ball soccer Complex in Frank, owned to Drain Brothers since 2007/08. (Why it was not brought up with council previously I do not know, maybe I missed that meeting.) Administration recommended that it be paid with $10,000 from the Ball Complex budget and $15,000 from reserves. Councilor Mitchell suggested that the $15,000 come out of next years budget. Passed by a vote of 6-1 (Saje opposed)
6. Tour Date with Spray Lakes. Determined it would take place Dec 17. Passed Unanimously Recommend to Council
7. Economic Task Force Initiative-withdrew by the Mayor not ready at this point still working on putting together
8. Waiving of Off site Levy for the Food Bank-Food Bank requested Council waive the off site levy ($7800) for their new building on 19th avenue. Council debated the merits of waiving 50% versus 100%, additionally there was concern raised about the standard of the building. The position was taken that 100% of the Off site Levy would be waived this passed by 5-2 (Saindon and Londsbury opposed)
9. Note-This item was added with direction from administration that this should have been added at the start of the meeting. Cancellation of the November 23, 2010 G + P meeting. Passed by a vote of 6-1 (Saje opposed)
   
   At this point Council adjourned to go into Camera.

Lets talk about advertising in the Crowsnest Pass

Since my first day on council I have always argued that municipal services, should be tendered out to get the best possible deal for the taxpayers.
A good example of that is the debate we recently had about the engineering on the Sentinel Bridge. For more than seven years we have used the same firm without going to bids to see if we could get a better deal.
Anyway back to advertising, if you go almost any where else other than the Crowsnest Pass you will find that most towns, cities and municipalities put out there advertising for tender to receive the best possible deal.
I have argued ever year since 2004 that we should do that, for some strange reason the majority of council disagreed with that position until a couple of years ago.
Arguments were made that not everybody reads the same paper, which I suspect is the case everywhere.
The argument was made that I had a bias against one of the papers, which was never the case and was certainly covered by the fact that my position and the one that council agreed to was that the advertising would be decided by competition and go to the lowest bid.
Which as indeed been proven by the fact that each paper as had the advertising for one year.
So lets get back to the dollars and cents did this attempt to save taxpayers dollars work?

2008 the municipality spent $98865.07
2009 $39994.10 was spent
2010 to the end of August we spent $15157.24 prorated to the end of the year that would come to $22735.86 a drop of $76129.21 since 2008.

Competition is a good thing and I certainly hope that the next council takes the same position on engineering.

Update from the Crowsnest Pass

I was going to title this update something different but then I was informed, that "your right to know" or "rumors and facts" were already taken.
So I will just stick to the old fashioned bland Update from the Crowsnest Pass.

What's happened since I last posted with good old politics in the Crowsnest Pass?

Just before Christmas we achieved several things:
We completed a budget prior to the end of the year a first since I have been on council.
How did we do this? several ways we directed administration to bring back a budget with no more than a 3% increase, that's the good news.
Then we increased our revenue in the following areas:
Water Rates increase by $3.00 per month per household (last increase 2002)
Garbage Rates increase by $1.50 per month per household (last increase 2007)
Municipal Electrical Rates will increase $12.28 per month between now and July 1, (last increase 2002). This will bring our rates in line with Fortis in the Crowsnest Pass we are in the unusually position of half our tenants are on the municipal system and half are on Fortis.
You may ask why rates have not increased since 2002, that's a good question and to ensure that it does not happen again administration as been directed to bring to Council on a annual basis a review of all municipal charges, fees, and fines.
The other new measure we introduced was a Minimum tax, $500 per tax roll number. There is no question this is a new revenue stream for the Municipality. Several comments based on last years mill rate if your property was worth more than $50,000 you were already paying more than $500. If you own a second property next to your principal property that you only use for your on needs you can consolidate in to the principal property and avoid the minimum tax.
The net result of this budget is that the typically average resident is going to see the lowest tax increase in the last five years. (subject to variations in assessment values).

Just prior to Christmas we also reached a collective agreement with our employees (CUPE), its a two year agreement, which I will not comment further on until our employees have had the chance to ratify it on Jan 21.

Crowsnest Centre, yes the saga continues. Despite the society taking the position that they did not need municipal tax dollars for 2009, we the taxpayers did have to pay their Nexen and telus bills in December. And yes the municipality did pay those bills out of reserve dollars that were generated by an insurance payout on the old centre budget.
Where I get confused is that some people think that those Insurance dollars belonged to the centre. The last I checked the Centre is an asset owned by the Municipality of Crowsnest Pass (taxpayers) just like the arenas, the equipment we own and any other assets. Which pot the money goes into and where it is spent is a decision made by the "elected" representatives of the taxpayers, not some unelected board that we never have to face an election.

Newspaper advertising, finally after arguing this issue for 5 years council agreed to tender this out to the lowest bidder. Our advertising cost for 2009 will be somewhere around $30-35,000 previous years as high as $110,000 that's a savings of roughly $70,000 a year over the five years that I have raised this issue a potential savings of $350,000 that could have purchase four additional used graders. Without costing the taxpayer one extra dollar.
Arguments were made that one papers page was larger than the other, I don't care, as long as the information can be read does it matter if the words are larger in one paper than the other? It was a simple decision in May and again in December, which paper had the lowest cost per page. That is the way I will always vote on this issue. The other argument that was made was that tax dollars are going out of town. Does that mean we should spend higher taxpayer dollars to give a contract to a local contractor?
That will work well when we are handing out $5,000,000 Infrastructure contracts.

Off site levies, it came to my attention just before the holidays that a local resident, who had been living in a older single wide trailer for years had purchased a new modular home put it on the same lot, and was told that he was going to be charged off site levies. My impression of off site levies, were that they would be charged against new developments where somebody was taking a bare piece of land and adding burden to the municipalities infrastructure, or if you were taking a piece of land that had one residence on it and replacing it with a duplex, apartment building etc, where once again the burden on municipal infrastructure was being increased. Fortunately after a debate amongst council it was agreed that the bylaw would be rewritten to ensure this does not happen again.

Going back to Budget, even though council as passed the budget the process is not completely over at this point. We have to wait for the province to set the educational levy so we can set the mill rate. In between I am hoping that council will keep working to cut costs and increase the surplus, we have a problem that is not going to go away.
Our reserves will be down to $670,000 by the end of the year, we are spending $520,000 this year out of reserves to complete capital projects. What happens after 2011 when our reserves run out. We need to start putting dollars back into those reserves this year.

Anyway a little update on things in the Crowsnest Pass

Budget Gap Closes in the Crowsnest Pass

I am now working on my fifth budget since I have been a councilor in the Crowsnest Pass. The annual exercise of trying to make to few dollars go to far. Every year we take dollars away from our various municipal departments, organizations that the taxpayers wish to assist. Then we nail our taxpayers with increases to fill the gap left over. All the time I have been arguing that we need to take a look at a number of areas where we duplicate services. One of those areas has been advertising all of our municipal business in two local newspapers. Despite some silly arguments that were presented:
Some people do not read one paper or the other- what about the people that read neither.
Not advertising in both papers may affect the business viability of one paper or the other-What if we had two bids on a water line could not the same argument be made?
One paper may be favoured over another-Its a tender process does anybody think our administration is going to recommend a higher bid?
The newspapers have different levels of circulation-Do we pick a contractor to pave streets because he paves more streets than his competition?
Well finally common sense prevails, the council of the Crowsnest Pass saw fit to go with advertising in one paper, the advertising will be tendered and hopefully we have some very competitive bids come forth.
This will close our budget gap by probably somewhere between $30,000 and $40,000 per year.
Just in the four and a half years I have been on council we have spent somewhere between $150,000 and $200,000 in duplicating our advertising.

That amount could buy a Grader for our public works department, support our allied arts contribution for 7-10 years, run our second arena for a year. Or take 2.5% of this years tax increase.

Also last night we decided to go one step further on the path to fiscal responsibility, we will no longer be advertising our utility bills due date. A practice that we were throwing away $3-4000 per year on.

Where does my tax dollars go in the Crowsnest Pass

Did you know that in 2008 we are budgeted to spend $267,872 just to insure our Facilities, Vehicle's etc?


Did you know that between 2005 and 2008 the Municipality as spent $265,584 on local advertising?

In 2005 we spent $3,152,488 or 33% of our operating budget on wages and benefits.
In 2008 our budget for wages and benefits is $3,904,854 or 44% of our operational budget.