Municipality of Crowsnest Pass Spending our money again!

First of all this morning the Mayor on his weekly "chat with Randy show" talks about a third new hotel coming to the Pass. On the 6 acre property across from the high school that was only listed For Sale three weeks ago, that has not even sold yet. You would think that he would wrap up the hotel on the piece of land that's been available for three years before he moves on to another venture.

Maybe the fact that the land is being rezoned by council has got him prematurely excited. It's a huge leap forward from zoning to a new hotel I thought we would have learnt that lesson by now. 

Next from the Municipal web site http://www.crowsnestpass.com/finance-a-administration/employment I see we are now advertising for another addition to our bureaucratic team. Yes another one, a  Human Resources Administrator Permanent Part time. 

Their is no question I think anybody outside of the glass bubble called council chambers recognizes that we have a tremendous issue with morale among the work force. Probably more outstanding grievances than there as ever been in the history of the municipality. Don't believe me talk to the employees.

But the big question on my mind is our are we going to pay for all of these people to run this bureaucratic monster? It's not sustainable in the long term. 

Unless of course we are already funding them with the additional revenues from all these new hotels and coal mines.    

Note: Check out Joni McFarlane's latest update on the Crowsnest Centre site:

Costs released for proposed hotel

 http://www.crowsnestpasspromoter.com/2013/08/19/costs-released-for-proposed-hotel

Unbelievably the taxpayers paid for the snacks at the open house.  

My position on a bloated administration

After my last post http://crowsnestpasshome.blogspot.ca/2013/06/june-30-tax-deadline-where-does-our.html I have been asked by some of the comments on my blog and people on the street what my position would be if I was elected has a councilor in October regarding the structure of the municipal bureaucracy.

I will speak from my own experience sitting in that position for six years.  I would request the following information immediately:

1. Copies of all contracts between the municipality and it’s administrators.

2. Comparisons of each positions salary from 2010 to 2013, I certainly have a good idea on what was in place in 2010.

3. I would also ask for a break down of what area’s each administrator is responsible for today compared to 2010.

4. I would ask for a copy of each administrator’s qualifications, certifications and back grounds in the areas that they are currently administrating.

5. I do not believe a community of our size needs a three tier management structure (CAO, Directors, Managers) you can switch the titles around and name them what you wish but we do not need three tiers of management.

6. I also do not believe we need three people running the Protective Services area that is a luxury we can not afford.

Hopefully that provides some sense of the direction I will take regarding the issue of what I feel is a bloated administration. Keep in mind that to achieve any of the above will require a minimum of three other members of council that feel the same way I do about the municipal bureaucracy.   

Note: Cost of administration $4325 per day      

June 30 tax deadline where does our money go?

Over the last two weeks I have been adding the following to the bottom of all my posts, “Note: Keep in mind one very important number $4325”.  I have received a lot of calls, emails and questions asking me why $4325.

It is a very important number, it is directly related to one of the most important choices the taxpayers are going to have to make this fall. The choice between candidates who support a large bureaucracy at the municipal office more suited to administrating a community a lot larger than ours. Or candidates that support running a community that recognizes our wealthy neighbors are not going to give us money to maintain this large bureaucracy.

Why talk about this now? Several reasons two days from now taxes are due what better time than now to recognize a very important financial issue. Then the election is only “16” weeks away. It is time for potential candidates to talk about where they stand on this and other important issues.

Back to the $4325 that is what our Municipal Administration is costing us every single working day (Mon-Fri). Some people will not want to believe that number but do the math. Consider the following numbers arrived at with the best information I could access. (If present council and or administration feels I am off on any one of these I would gladly change my numbers)

CAO  $160,000

Director of Finance $110,000

Director of Planning, Engineering and Public Works $120,000

Director of Protective Services and Facilities $110,000

Fire Chief $95,000

Economic Development Officer $100,000

Deputy Fire Chief $85,000

Public Works Supt $85,000

Total of $865,000

Additional 30% to cover costs of benefits, WCB, EI, CPP, Health Insurance, Pensions etc.

Raises the total to $1,124,500 divided by 260 days is $4,325 a day.

Keep in mind this in no way reflects the cost to the taxpayers of pickups, computers, cell phones, office supplies etc.

Can we afford this and where do potential candidates stand on this issue.

Think about this when you slip your cheque into the municipal mail box this weekend.      

       

Incompetence creates Opportunity

The debate rages in the Crowsnest Pass about potential 7.5% tax increases, created by the surprise announcement April 8^th that the Assessment Base had dropped 5.2% instead of the 2% that Council and Administration had been working with for the last six months.

Time to clarify things I have had a number of discussions since Monday with people that assume a 7.5% mill rate increase means a 7.5% tax increase. It does not, most people struggle to understand how our municipal taxes are determined in Alberta.

The mill rate is only half of the equation the other half is the assessed value, they are both very significant to the process but have to be measured together to determine the real

rate of taxation.

Take an average residential home in the Crowsnest Pass valued at $200,000 the municipal portion of the mill rate last year was 5.87.

The simplest way to look at that would be for every $1,000 in value you would pay $5.87 in property tax to the municipality.   ( 200 x $5.87 equals $1174)

Council throughout their much vaulted tri annual budget process took a position that the mill rate would increase by 2.5% a year. They boxed themselves into a corner, I am surprised that nobody in either Council or Administration figured this out.

Why? If they had stated there would not be a tax increase of more than 2.5% each year we would not be sitting here today having this discussion.

A closer look at their problem the mill rate going up 2.5% would have increased it from 5.87 to 6.02 which on that same $200,000 home would have raised the taxes 2.5% to $1204.

Nobody from either Council or Administration asked the question (at least not while I was there) what happens if the Assessment Base drops? (say 5%)

Now the tax on that same home that was valued at $200,000 last year at a mill rate of 5.87 even with a 2.5% increase in the mill rate this year, will be taxed at a rate of $1144 a drop of $30 from last year. (190 x 6.02 equals $1144)

Imagine a much worse case scenario if the Assessment Base had gone up 10% that $200,000 home last year hit with a 2.5% mill rate increase you would now be paying $1324 an increase of $150 over last year or a 15% increase, this is exactly why a commitment to a set mill rate increase does not work. Set Tax Rate absolutely.  

While this is good news for the taxpayers, what will council do next year if the Assessment base drops another 5% or even more. This mistake on the Assessment base and the fixation on not increasing the mill rate more than 2.5% has created a $300,000 shortfall this year.

What does Council do now? Well they can go back on their pledge, one of the fundamental planks of their tri annual budget and increase the mill rate 7.5%, the other suggestion which I feel is even a worse option would be to take $295,000 out of reserves.

I agree with Councilor Saindon’s motion to find 4% fat in the system and reduce it. It will be very interesting to see what recommendations administration comes back with. The $300,000 shortfall could be made up very quickly by looking at the level of administration we have built and the dollars we pay to maintain them. Let us hope Council does not reduce service levels and programs such as recreation when we are running a very expensive bureaucracy.

Other options I am sure are many. Maybe we do not need to send four members of our council to conventions or our Mayor to an Economic Development Conference when the EDO is going to be working under the CAO, maybe our Weed Control person could survive one more year without a new pickup. Maybe the Public Relations consultant will not be receiving any more tax dollars from the Crowsnest Pass.

Five key points to my post today:

·        This could have been avoided if the 5.2% assessment base had been projected much earlier in the budget process.

·        If Council/Administration had been aware that a 2.5% mill rate is not the same has a 2.5% tax increase

·        Committing to a tax rate increase of a certain amount works, committing to a set mill rate does not, this is one of the down sides to a three year budget.

·        If council sticks to its 2.5% mill rate increase we will get a tax break, not due to them making a brilliant strategic move here, more because they got caught with their pants down on the assessment base. It could hurt the taxpayers much more when home values begin to rise we got lucky this time.

·        The devil is in the details, if Council makes $300,000 in cut’s where they are made is the most important issue to the public. Little Johnnie’s mom will not be happy if her boy can not play Lacrosse on a Friday night, but two brand new pickup's are running all over town.   

Can you figure out the answer? Numbers in the Crowsnest Pass

So quite a lot of debate in the last few months about the size of the Bureaucracy in the Crowsnest Pass you can read my post below where I presented the numbers of staff in the Municipal Office at the date of the election and the numbers today. In that post I tried to very simply show how there were 19 people working out of that office in Oct/2010 and there are now 24.5 a net gain of 6 people (With a further position coming when the new Peace Officer is hired).

http://crowsnestpasshome.blogspot.ca/2012/03/debating-numbers-in-crowsnest-pass.html

Today I read Councilor Gallant's response I expected something that would say either Dean your correct, or Dean your wrong there are now 24 positions and back at the last election there was 23. Now from Councilor Gallant post below it appears he as attempted to justify the positions. We and everybody around town could debate that for the next 18 months. The intent of my previous post was to point out that the bureaucracy has grown by one third in the last eighteen months I do not believe that Councilor Gallant has answered that comment do you? Read  his comments below and then vote on the right hand side.

For myself I have two simple questions was the number of 19 employees in October 2010 accurate.
Second is the number of 24.5 employees today incorrect. Go through both lists and tell me where I am wrong.



http://briangallant.ca/wordpress/2012/04/10/municipal-staffing-facts/