COALTeck Coal (100%)
Operating results at the 100% level are summarized in the following table:
Three months ended December 31--------Year ended December 31
-------------------------- 2010----2009-----2010-----2009
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Production (000's tonnes)-6,028-- 5,354---- 23,109--- 18,930
Sales (000's tonnes)------ 5,950---5,368---- 23,167----19,767
Average sale price
US$/tonne--------------- $ 200----$ 139----- $ 181----- $ 157
C$/tonne-----------------$ 204---- $ 151---- $ 188----- $ 177
Operating expenses (C$/tonne)
Cost of product sold------ $ 54------ $ 52------ $ 59------ $ 55
Transportation-----------$ 35------ $ 30------ $ 32------ $ 32
Depreciation/amortization $ 23------ $ 28------ $ 24------$ 26
Operating profit summary ($ millions)
Before depreciation/amortization $ 679--- $ 372--- $ 2,248--- $ 1,795
Depreciation and amortization---- (135)--- (153)---- (558)---- (517)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After depreciation/amortization-- $ 544--- $ 219--- $ 1,690--- $ 1,278
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rest of the company did the following:
We recorded record annual and record quarterly revenues of $9.3 billion and $2.8 billion, respectively. Operating profit for the year was a record $3.6 billion and cash flow from operating activities was $2.7 billion.
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Sunday, February 6, 2011
2011 versus 2010 tax increase
Just an another attempt to keep my readers fully informed.
We have to make sure that we do not get caught up as one of my commenter's stated in "smoke and mirrors".
So lets continue to compare apples to apples.
2010 achieved a 3.2% tax increase (which brought in an additional $200,000), despite $450,000 into reserves, and $250,000 into new equipment.
2011 achieved a 0% tax increase with no money placed into reserves, for new equipment no dollars spend, equipment will be paid for by borrowing, debt load increased bt $550,000.
Another important factor to remember before we all finish thrashing around in the glory of the 0% tax increase.
The end result may well not be the 0% the province as not set the education portion for the municipalities yet,
That increased by $150,000 last year about 75% of that tax increase, provincial budget is supposed to be announced on Feb 24th.
In addition the assessment process is usually not completed at this point so that usually ends up in a tweaking of the budget.
Time will tell.
We have to make sure that we do not get caught up as one of my commenter's stated in "smoke and mirrors".
So lets continue to compare apples to apples.
2010 achieved a 3.2% tax increase (which brought in an additional $200,000), despite $450,000 into reserves, and $250,000 into new equipment.
2011 achieved a 0% tax increase with no money placed into reserves, for new equipment no dollars spend, equipment will be paid for by borrowing, debt load increased bt $550,000.
Another important factor to remember before we all finish thrashing around in the glory of the 0% tax increase.
The end result may well not be the 0% the province as not set the education portion for the municipalities yet,
That increased by $150,000 last year about 75% of that tax increase, provincial budget is supposed to be announced on Feb 24th.
In addition the assessment process is usually not completed at this point so that usually ends up in a tweaking of the budget.
Time will tell.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Where do numbers come from?
The municipalities financial statements.
We can debate all night long about weather new positions are just old positions being reincarnated, or a full time position is not really new because it was half time before. Or we will get a grant for a position for the next three years so it does not really count or we can take FCSS money and spend it on additional staff instead of going to programs. So it really does not count either.
But at the end of the day the numbers never lie so when I get them I will print them and then we will all get to read them together.
All of these numbers appear on the municipalities web site under the financial statements.
2000 Total cost of Salaries/Wages/Benefits $2,693,585
2005 Total cost of Salaries/Wages/Benefits $3,593,322
2009 Total cost of Salaries/Wages/Benefits $4,572,803
2010 Total cost of Salaries/Wages/Benefits ??????????
2011 Total cost of Salaries/Wages/Benefits ??????????
The number grew from 2000 to 2009 at an average of 7% a year is that sustainable?, how much will 2010's number grow by? What will be the projection for 2011 will the public see that?
We can debate all night long about weather new positions are just old positions being reincarnated, or a full time position is not really new because it was half time before. Or we will get a grant for a position for the next three years so it does not really count or we can take FCSS money and spend it on additional staff instead of going to programs. So it really does not count either.
But at the end of the day the numbers never lie so when I get them I will print them and then we will all get to read them together.
All of these numbers appear on the municipalities web site under the financial statements.
2000 Total cost of Salaries/Wages/Benefits $2,693,585
2005 Total cost of Salaries/Wages/Benefits $3,593,322
2009 Total cost of Salaries/Wages/Benefits $4,572,803
2010 Total cost of Salaries/Wages/Benefits ??????????
2011 Total cost of Salaries/Wages/Benefits ??????????
The number grew from 2000 to 2009 at an average of 7% a year is that sustainable?, how much will 2010's number grow by? What will be the projection for 2011 will the public see that?
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Looking for updates on the Teck/Elkview Labour Dispute
Check out the following sites:
http://www.usw9346.ca/bargaining.htm
http://www.teck.com/Generic.aspx?portalName=tc
Also of interest the following site which is the port http://www.westshore.com/ I told by a number of people that one of the ship loaders was down, which was true its now up and running as of Jan 24, 2011.
http://www.usw9346.ca/bargaining.htm
http://www.teck.com/Generic.aspx?portalName=tc
Also of interest the following site which is the port http://www.westshore.com/ I told by a number of people that one of the ship loaders was down, which was true its now up and running as of Jan 24, 2011.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
2011 Budget passed 0%? (Really)
First of all I would say congratulations to the new council on passing a budget with a 0% increase.
Some comments raised with me today around town regarding this budget.
Why didn't the previous council pass a budget with a 0% increase?
Good question first of all we could have. Last year we raised taxes 3.2%, remember each 1% increase in taxes equals roughly $65,000. So 3.2% equalled $200,000.
How can I make the statement that we could have done 0%.
Well think about this, in 2010 council placed $450,000 back into reserves, council also took $250,000 and purchased equipment. That a total of $700,000 minus the $200,000 (tax increase) that would have left $500,000 divided by $65,000 that comes out to 7.7% yes if the last council had took the same position as this council, taxes could have been "cut" by 7.7%.
Why did they not do that especially in an election year?
I can only speak for myself.
After years of depleting the municipal reserves and arguing that we needed to get our financies in order. I felt it was time and the responsible thing to do to start rebuilding those reserves. In fact on a number of occasions I heard present councilors stress the need for building up the reserves.
Two, previous council had a policy of spending $250,000 each year to replace the aging equipment fleet, not by incurring debt but by actually putting aside dollars each year.
Number of dollars allocated in 2011 to reserves? Zero
Number of dollars allocated to purchase equipment $550,000 all of it in debt.
How many new employees will be hired because of this new budget?
One new Foreman position for public works
One new position for HR
One new position for Community Services, one employee was previously looking after programming and FCSS, there will now be a full time position for each job (1 becomes 2)
One half time position for finance.
One full time position for Agricultural Services this used to be a part time position
Did the Mayor state that over time, positions will be eliminated by attrition, retirement and reassignment of job duties?
Yes he did, do you really think that CUPE is going to co-operate with management to eliminate positions. Do you really believe that positions will not be refilled? we will find out in March.
Another councilor as stated on his blog that at least we did not raise taxes in our first year 11.2% like the previous council.
Well first of all let me say I never voted for that, so I will not take on that responsibility.
Second the last council left the municipality in a much better financial position our last year we left a budget with a surplus of $450,000 to be placed back into reserves. In 2007 the new council was left with a deficit to deal with.
Also this council did not have the anchor around its neck of having to put $100,000 plus into the Crowsnest Centre! another 2%.
The comment was made last night that taxes should have gone up 2-3%, I ask why with no money in reserves and financing new equipment quite the opposite taxes should have gone down.
But the budget is done now which is good, and we will see where things go. The comment was made during the budget process that between council and administration enough savings could be found in the next six months to pay for the back hoe. So I look forward to seeing a huge surplus in 2011
Some comments raised with me today around town regarding this budget.
Why didn't the previous council pass a budget with a 0% increase?
Good question first of all we could have. Last year we raised taxes 3.2%, remember each 1% increase in taxes equals roughly $65,000. So 3.2% equalled $200,000.
How can I make the statement that we could have done 0%.
Well think about this, in 2010 council placed $450,000 back into reserves, council also took $250,000 and purchased equipment. That a total of $700,000 minus the $200,000 (tax increase) that would have left $500,000 divided by $65,000 that comes out to 7.7% yes if the last council had took the same position as this council, taxes could have been "cut" by 7.7%.
Why did they not do that especially in an election year?
I can only speak for myself.
After years of depleting the municipal reserves and arguing that we needed to get our financies in order. I felt it was time and the responsible thing to do to start rebuilding those reserves. In fact on a number of occasions I heard present councilors stress the need for building up the reserves.
Two, previous council had a policy of spending $250,000 each year to replace the aging equipment fleet, not by incurring debt but by actually putting aside dollars each year.
Number of dollars allocated in 2011 to reserves? Zero
Number of dollars allocated to purchase equipment $550,000 all of it in debt.
How many new employees will be hired because of this new budget?
One new Foreman position for public works
One new position for HR
One new position for Community Services, one employee was previously looking after programming and FCSS, there will now be a full time position for each job (1 becomes 2)
One half time position for finance.
One full time position for Agricultural Services this used to be a part time position
Did the Mayor state that over time, positions will be eliminated by attrition, retirement and reassignment of job duties?
Yes he did, do you really think that CUPE is going to co-operate with management to eliminate positions. Do you really believe that positions will not be refilled? we will find out in March.
Another councilor as stated on his blog that at least we did not raise taxes in our first year 11.2% like the previous council.
Well first of all let me say I never voted for that, so I will not take on that responsibility.
Second the last council left the municipality in a much better financial position our last year we left a budget with a surplus of $450,000 to be placed back into reserves. In 2007 the new council was left with a deficit to deal with.
Also this council did not have the anchor around its neck of having to put $100,000 plus into the Crowsnest Centre! another 2%.
The comment was made last night that taxes should have gone up 2-3%, I ask why with no money in reserves and financing new equipment quite the opposite taxes should have gone down.
But the budget is done now which is good, and we will see where things go. The comment was made during the budget process that between council and administration enough savings could be found in the next six months to pay for the back hoe. So I look forward to seeing a huge surplus in 2011
Crowsnest Pass Council Meeting Feb 1, 2011
Crowsnest Pass Council Meeting Feb 1, 2011
Adoption of Agenda:
Councilor Mitchell added item #7 under other business Emergency Manual
Mayor Decoux removed Item #4 under other business AUMA Mayors Caucus
Motion to accept amended agenda passed unanimously
Adoption of previous Minutes
Few minor spelling errors motion to accept minutes as corrected passed unanimously
Delegations:
Mark Murphy from Emergency Management Services for Southern Alberta was scheduled to present an update on the CNP emergency plan he was unable to attend so CAO Tully Clifford presented his comments instead on our municipal emergency plan.
He felt that the present plan is very good, and the municipality is very well prepared. Also stated that the plan will be formatted and placed on the municipal web site.
Admin and Agency Reports: None
Business Arising from the Minutes:
Budget 2011.
Concerns and comments raised by council:
Hiring of more staff
Not raising taxes a good thing
Money needs to go into reserves but will be dealt with later in the year
Some felt the need for Track Hoe
One councilor felt that the $30,000 removed from advertising should be placed back in.
Need more staff in the office
Taxes should go up 2-3%
Could we not just get by with the Foreman and the HR person
Track if purchased should have all the necessary equipment to go with it.
External organizations should have clear terms of reference, and mandates
It is a myth that the municipal office has too many employees
Retirement, attrition and reassignment of work duties will reduce the workforce down the road.
Concern about holding tax increases to low amounts and then hitting the taxpayers harder in future years.
Motion to accept the budget as presented passed by a vote of 5-1 Councilor Saje absent and Councilor Saindon opposed.
Correspondence:
Alberta Order of Excellence, council members to provide names to CAO
Committee Reports
1. G+P minutes January 25 motion to accept passed unanimously
2. Municipal Heritage Board Minutes of April 28, 2010 motion to accept passed unanimously
3. Police Advisory Board Minutes of November 29 motion to accept passed unanimously
Bylaws: None
Notices of Motion: None
Other Business:
1. Proposed Policy Development Procedures and Templates Motion to accept passed unanimously; Mayor Decoux also raised the issue of the policy committee and expanding its membership by adding two councilors. Motion to accept and add councilors Mitchell and Gallant passed unanimously
2. Appointments to the SDA, Motion to accept the appointments of Bill MacIntyre and Loretta Thompson to the SDA passed unanimously
3. Approval for signage on Municipal property besides the Blairmore Liquor store. Motion to deny passed unanimously.
4. AUMA mayors caucus removed by Mayor Decoux
5. Senior Housing Board appointment, Motion to accept Sasha Jagerbaird to the Seniors Board passed unanimously
6. Tipping Fee Request, Request by a non-profit group to remove an older home and have the municipality waive the tipping fees. Councilor Saindon motioned for the municipality to take the concrete and brick to the municipal pit in Passburg and the rest of the material to go to the land fill with the municipality covering the first $2000 of tipping fees. Motion passed 5-1 Councilor Gallant opposed.
7. Emergency Manuals, added to the agenda by Councilor Mitchell and withdrew by Councilor Mitchell
Council Member reports: Councilor Saindon attended the Chinook Library board meeting; Mayor Decoux attended the Devon cheque presentation. Councilor Gail stated that he intended to attend the cheque presentation but did not.
Public Input: None
In Camera: None
Motion to adjourn: Passed unanimously.
Adoption of Agenda:
Councilor Mitchell added item #7 under other business Emergency Manual
Mayor Decoux removed Item #4 under other business AUMA Mayors Caucus
Motion to accept amended agenda passed unanimously
Adoption of previous Minutes
Few minor spelling errors motion to accept minutes as corrected passed unanimously
Delegations:
Mark Murphy from Emergency Management Services for Southern Alberta was scheduled to present an update on the CNP emergency plan he was unable to attend so CAO Tully Clifford presented his comments instead on our municipal emergency plan.
He felt that the present plan is very good, and the municipality is very well prepared. Also stated that the plan will be formatted and placed on the municipal web site.
Admin and Agency Reports: None
Business Arising from the Minutes:
Budget 2011.
Concerns and comments raised by council:
Hiring of more staff
Not raising taxes a good thing
Money needs to go into reserves but will be dealt with later in the year
Some felt the need for Track Hoe
One councilor felt that the $30,000 removed from advertising should be placed back in.
Need more staff in the office
Taxes should go up 2-3%
Could we not just get by with the Foreman and the HR person
Track if purchased should have all the necessary equipment to go with it.
External organizations should have clear terms of reference, and mandates
It is a myth that the municipal office has too many employees
Retirement, attrition and reassignment of work duties will reduce the workforce down the road.
Concern about holding tax increases to low amounts and then hitting the taxpayers harder in future years.
Motion to accept the budget as presented passed by a vote of 5-1 Councilor Saje absent and Councilor Saindon opposed.
Correspondence:
Alberta Order of Excellence, council members to provide names to CAO
Committee Reports
1. G+P minutes January 25 motion to accept passed unanimously
2. Municipal Heritage Board Minutes of April 28, 2010 motion to accept passed unanimously
3. Police Advisory Board Minutes of November 29 motion to accept passed unanimously
Bylaws: None
Notices of Motion: None
Other Business:
1. Proposed Policy Development Procedures and Templates Motion to accept passed unanimously; Mayor Decoux also raised the issue of the policy committee and expanding its membership by adding two councilors. Motion to accept and add councilors Mitchell and Gallant passed unanimously
2. Appointments to the SDA, Motion to accept the appointments of Bill MacIntyre and Loretta Thompson to the SDA passed unanimously
3. Approval for signage on Municipal property besides the Blairmore Liquor store. Motion to deny passed unanimously.
4. AUMA mayors caucus removed by Mayor Decoux
5. Senior Housing Board appointment, Motion to accept Sasha Jagerbaird to the Seniors Board passed unanimously
6. Tipping Fee Request, Request by a non-profit group to remove an older home and have the municipality waive the tipping fees. Councilor Saindon motioned for the municipality to take the concrete and brick to the municipal pit in Passburg and the rest of the material to go to the land fill with the municipality covering the first $2000 of tipping fees. Motion passed 5-1 Councilor Gallant opposed.
7. Emergency Manuals, added to the agenda by Councilor Mitchell and withdrew by Councilor Mitchell
Council Member reports: Councilor Saindon attended the Chinook Library board meeting; Mayor Decoux attended the Devon cheque presentation. Councilor Gail stated that he intended to attend the cheque presentation but did not.
Public Input: None
In Camera: None
Motion to adjourn: Passed unanimously.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Budget so what happens tonight? Crowsnest Pass
Well last meeting council sent administration away, to review the 2011 budget package.
I "assumed" (bad word) that tonight they would come back with a slightly fine tuned package that allows the politicians to look better.
If you go to the right of my blog and click on the Municipal Web site, you can read for yourself under council packages what is being brought back by administration tonight.
It's the same proposal as last time, so the politicians have clearly had the tough choices thrown back into their lap by administration.
Many Options available:
They can eat what they are being spoon fed.
They can go with a recommended 0% tax increase, or 1 or 2%.
They can choice to create 5 more positions, using the old government theory that we have to get bigger before we get smaller.
They can choice to not put any dollars into reserves.
They can choice to finance two new pieces of equipment, or one or none.
Or they can choice to do something different.
I hear of nothing for affordable housing, marketing the community, economic development, prelimary studies for new facilities etc etc.
Keep in mind that if any of these things are going to be done there will have to be dollars provided at some point. By this time next year when their second budget is finalized their term will be almost half over.
I agree with Councilor Saje no new positions should be hired until the organizational review takes place. We all know once the new positions are in place no review is going to say that a mistake was made. Unfortunatly Councilor Saje will not be there tonight.
Anyway it will be interesting to see what comes out of tonight.
I "assumed" (bad word) that tonight they would come back with a slightly fine tuned package that allows the politicians to look better.
If you go to the right of my blog and click on the Municipal Web site, you can read for yourself under council packages what is being brought back by administration tonight.
It's the same proposal as last time, so the politicians have clearly had the tough choices thrown back into their lap by administration.
Many Options available:
They can eat what they are being spoon fed.
They can go with a recommended 0% tax increase, or 1 or 2%.
They can choice to create 5 more positions, using the old government theory that we have to get bigger before we get smaller.
They can choice to not put any dollars into reserves.
They can choice to finance two new pieces of equipment, or one or none.
Or they can choice to do something different.
I hear of nothing for affordable housing, marketing the community, economic development, prelimary studies for new facilities etc etc.
Keep in mind that if any of these things are going to be done there will have to be dollars provided at some point. By this time next year when their second budget is finalized their term will be almost half over.
I agree with Councilor Saje no new positions should be hired until the organizational review takes place. We all know once the new positions are in place no review is going to say that a mistake was made. Unfortunatly Councilor Saje will not be there tonight.
Anyway it will be interesting to see what comes out of tonight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)