Numbers, Figure this mess out and win a big prize.

After numerous requests to compare the various numbers that have been presented on the Rum Runner Days I will attempt to provide that information. It’s very hard to do because to have a true comparison you need to use the same categories in each case but that was not done so it becomes difficult. All the numbers in black were the ones presented to the Rum Runner Days committee on Feb 22, the numbers in green were the one’s provided by Councillor Saindon on March 13, finally the numbers in red are the one’s provided to the public at the Nov 6 council meeting.

Total revenue of $93,750 made up of the following:

Cash on Hand $0    $16,000

Municipal contribution $50,000  $50,000 $40,000

Carnival rides $2,500 $2,500

Business Licenses $2,250 $3,000

Vendor Permits $4,500 $6,000

Camping $16,500 $10,000

Thunder in the Valley $3,000 $2,000

Lions Club $2,000 $2,000

Parking Shuttle $13,000 $9,500

Municipal Soft Costs $25,000

Friday Night Wine and Arts $1,500

Saturday Night Concert $15,000

Saturday Night Food and Beverage $2,500

Merchandise Sales $15,000

Show and Shine Revenue $2,500

Sponsorships $19,247

Revenues from Venues and Merchandise Sales $16,944

Cost Recoveries $9,260

With costs of the following which added up to $168,880:

Municipal staff costs $32,280 $19,200 $9,010

Municipal equipment $10,000 $0

Municipal office $11,200 $6,600

Advertising $3,000 $3,000

Website design/modifications $3,500 $3,500

Promotion $2,000 $2,000

Washroom rentals $16,500 $12,500

Waste pickup and disposal $4,000 $4,000

Security Fencing $500 $1,500

Tent and Accessories rental $1,500 $2,500

Lethbridge Search and Rescue $7,500 $0

RCMP Policing $35,000 $20,000

Regional Peace Officers/Sheriffs $25,000 $15,000

Bus Rentals $9,600 $1,920

Donation to Boys and Girls Club $2,000 $1,500

Donation to Coleman Society $1,800 $1,500

Donation to Kanaskis Rodeo $2,000 $1,500

Donation to Quad Squad $1,500 $1,500

Wine and Art night $1,500

Saturday Night concert $8,500

Gazebo Park Entertainment $3,000

Kids Show $3,500

Stage Rental $13,500

Show and Shine Merchandise $4,000

Merchandise Purchase Costs $20,000

Advertising and promotions (Including T-shirts) $25,642

Bank Charges $76

Entertainment, Parade and Show and Shine $33,316

Licenses, permits and Insurance $390

Printing, Copying, Paper, Postage $3,420

Transportation $640

Port a potties, Handwash Stations and Dumpsters $5,561

Security (Includes RCMP) $18,017

Signage $2,394

Confused? I am typing this and pride myself on being good with numbers but this boggles my mind.

Let’s try to decipher things a little bit maybe the confusion and hysteria that came with these numbers were created for a reason.

Revenue Feb 22, $93,750  March 13, $160,500  November 6, $85,452

Costs Feb 22, $168,880 March 13, $151,720 November 6, $89,456

Loss Feb 22, $75,130 March 13, $8,780 (profit) November 6, $4,004 (loss)

Now let us compare a few of the categories that make up the numbers above:

Municipal staff costs went from $32,280 to $19,200 to $9,010

Municipal equipment from $10,000 to zero to zero

Washroom rentals, waste pickup and dumpsters $20,500 to $16,500 to $5,561

Policing/Peace Officers $60,000 to $35,000 to $18,017

 Just in the four area’s above you have numbers going from $122,780 to $70,700 to $32,588.

Anybody get the feeling that the numbers were inflated for a reason? Imagine if they were going to buy a piece of equipment and the first quote they received was for $1,227,800 then the second quote was for $707,000 then the actual price was $325,880. You would look at the salesmen like they were idiots.

Swimming Pool Authorities and Hot Political Potatoes

Under administrative and agency reports last night was the item Dissolution of Board and Authority. The following was taken from the Municipal web site.

“Dissolution of Board and Authority

Myron Thompson, Chief Administrative Officer, provided and reviewed a written report in reference to formally dissolving the Culture and Recreation Board and the Swimming Pool Facility Authority.

M#-6683-12: Councillor Mitchell moved that Administration’s recommendation be split into two separate motions:

􀂃 A motion to formally dissolve the Recreation and Culture Board acknowledging the

establishment of the Sport and Recreation Committee and the Culture and Heritage

Committee as its replacement and;

􀂃 A motion on the Swimming Pool Facility Authority.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

M#-6684-12: Councillor Saje moved that Council formally dissolves the Recreation and Culture Board acknowledging the establishment of the Sport and Recreation Committee and the Culture and Heritage Committee as its replacement effective January 1, 2013.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

M#-6685-12: Councillor Saje moved not to dissolve the Swimming Pool Facility Authority and discuss with the Sport and Recreation Committee how to proceed with their portion of overseeing the pool.

Discussion took place on the wording of the motion

Motion not Withdrawn

M#-6686-12: Councillor Saindon moved to table the motion in reference to the Swimming Pool Facility Authority.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY”

Comments:

During the CAO comments at the start of this process, he informed council that administration had met with the ladies from the swimming pool authority prior to the season commencing in May, and again during the season to inform them that the operation of the swimming pool would change and be ran by the municipality instead of the authority.

Once the first motion was dealt with on the rec and culture board then the Mayor asked for a motion on the dissolution of the Swimming Pool authority, the room went silent everybody began to stare at the roof nobody was touching this “hot political potato” the silence was deafening.

So then the Mayor pushed for something from his council on this issue, that’s when Councilor Sage came up with M#6685-12. This is when confusion set in, I and I think 90% of the people in the room were not clear on if Mr Sage was trying to roll the authority into the new board or leave them in place. Then Councilor Gallant made a friendly amendment to the motion to involve the authority in discussions with the new board about what their role at the pool would be.

Then there was more discussions about if the authority had been probably informed of the change in the operation of the facility, again more from administration confirming there previous comments and what appeared to be more confusion amongst council.

Then Councilor Saindon made the motion to table this issue which of course was passed unanimously. After all this I was thinking back to a comment that somebody had made to me about this issue, that maybe the councilors did not know what was really going on here between administration and the pool authority. With all the confusion my little brain was saying this may well be true.

Until the Mayor spoke up after Mr Saindon’s motion, when he informed administration that they better provide council clear precise information, and that councilors better take that information and come back to the next meeting prepared to deal with this issue. “Especially now that they were flying in the face of a decision that they had previously made”.   

Confusion in the Crowsnest Pass

Below is a Municipal "Press Release" simply titled "Press Release" can anybody clarify what is going on here?

This "Press Release" seems to say what?

Maybe tomorrow there will be a "Press Release" that says "the municipality will continue to perform business as usual, and we will update you when there is something different going on"   

"The Municipality continues to transition the Fire Services and Search and Rescue Departments towards a single integrated department as per the structure change approved in November 2011.  Council and Administration wish to thank All Fire Services Incorporated for the assistance and support towards the initiation of this process.  The Municipality will continue to move forward in the restructuring process as the new Director of Protective and Community Services assumes their duties." 


On March 6,2012 the following motion was passed by council:
M#6441-12: Councillor Mitchell moved that Council through resolution appoints Donna Tona, CTS Interim Manager of Enforcement Services and KJ (Ken) Brands Interim Manager of Protective Services with all the permissions and requirements for decisions within the Departments of Fire & Rescue Services and Enforcement Services.


On the Pass Herald site http://passherald.ca/archives/120327/index.htm they have announced that Interim Manager of Protective Services Ken Brands has ended his relationship with the Municipality.

Pandora's Box is opened

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".