Holiday Inn in the Crowsnest Pass

Just a matter of 10 days ago my fellow blogger Mr Prince put out the news that the word on the street was we were getting a Holiday Inn. At last council meeting CAO Thompson announced that negotiations were going very well with the developer and should be wrapped up in a couple of weeks. Well last night the CAO gave another update negotiations are still going well and should be wrapped up in the next 30 days.

I hope we are not being led down the garden path, anybody hear anything about the Quebec manufacturer lately? I suspect bargaining with the developer is down to that key area now? money and municipal concessions. 

Note: Does not look like the Centre will be gone prior to first snow fall. Or was that just one of the items "that can be taken with a grain of salt"   

Rum Runner Days (The real numbers)

Well it seems only like yesterday that the Thunder in the Valley event was deferred.
The issues being the safety of the public all those unruly characters coming to our town filling the jails and costs, numbers were thrown around like confetti at a wedding, $100,000, $150,000 with every new number being larger than the last.
I wish I had a copy of the editorial from the Pass Herald written by Lisa Sygutek it was very well written and spoke about how inflated the numbers were to justify the cancellation of Thunder in the Valley, she was right.  
Never the less the decision was made to proceed with the Rum Runner weekend and bring in new events, family orientated (Wine and cheese festival) vendors, bands for the evening remember the Rum Runner Days flyer that we received with our utility bills (expecting 20,000 plus people).  So the security was all in place for the influx of people finally after years of not knowing what this weekend cost the taxpayers we would have certainty of financial information.
So in March I asked Councillor Saindon for his committee's budget which he was kind enough to share with me it appeared the weekend was projected to actually make money. Revenue's of $160,500 with expenditure's of only $151,720 well finally last night three and a half months after the event Council was provided a financial breakdown of the weekend.  

Revenues projected at $160,500 actually turned out to be $45,452.
Expenses projected at $151,720 actually turned out to be $89,456.

Remember all the big numbers for RCMP/Security/Peace Officers at one point the number of $60-70,000 was being thrown around then with the committee budget it was dropped to $35,000 actually ended up being $18,017.
On the issue of unlawful behaviour we had 5 less people in jail this year than last.

Note: When Councillor Saindon presented his report last night he spoke with great emotion about the difficult time his wife went through with personal medical problems, and the stress of what she was required to do to put on the Rum Runner Days weekend. That I have a lot of understanding for I know what it's like to be in the centre of the Crowsnest Pass political world when you are having to deal with a family crisis.

What I did not like was when he criticized all the people that choose not to participate in the weekend either as a volunteer or participant, and the criticism of people and groups not willing to change, to make Rum Runner Days into what council's vision of it should be. Just maybe on this weekend the silent majority disagreed with council.  

After months of crunching numbers the results are in.

Before I discuss the numbers that were presented last night people need to go back and read the article below, regarding the cancellation of Thunder In the Valley.
Two justifications from the politicians/administration safety and costs.


http://passherald.ca/archives/120313/index1.htm


Some quotes from that article:

According to Thompson, the total cost to put on the entire Rum Runner Days weekend, including Thunder in the Valley, would come in at around $197,000 this year, due in large part to the need for increased policing costs (an additional $35,000) and $25,000 to bring in regional peace officers to help with enforcement during the fireworks, as well as additional costs such as $23,000 for CP Rail police and fencing along the railroad tracks in Blairmore, the cost of running a shuttle service for those attending the fireworks show, and roughly $40,000 in “soft costs” such as employee time and services. 

“If this event is now going to cost us over $150,000, I’m going to have a really hard time supporting additional costs,” said Councillor Brian Gallant.


Then below is the budget I received from Councilor Saindon on March 13th.

http://crowsnestpasshome.blogspot.ca/2012/11/rum-runner-days-getting-numbers.html

Councillor Gallant's response to the Ratepayers Petition

On Councillors Gallant's Blog is his opinion regarding the Ratepayers Petition

Take the time to read it if you can, looking forward to my reader's comments. Remember I will not censor any comments has long as they are not personnel or slanderous.

http://briangallant.ca/wordpress/2012/11/03/the-other-side-of-the-petition/

Dean's Comments

 A couple of points that come to mind after a quick review of Councilor Gallant's comments.

First of all his comments regarding people/businesses being intimidated or mislead. If that is true a simple call to municipal affairs from enough people will get that departments attention, there is a toll free number in the phone book and your call is confidential.

Mislead, there are 2500 people on that petition in less than three weeks. The group that went around in late 2008 had 1201 names. Does he really believe that an additional 1300 people can be "misled" maybe he is thinking we have a lot of dumb people here (I don't think so).

Mr. Gallant made the following comment:   "Has anyone else out there realized that there was a petition against council, which ended in a consultant hired by council to conduct an inquiry, almost exactly three years ago?"

This was not true, when the budget process began in October of 2008 a number of councilors requested that a corporate review take place. The majority recognized we had problems in the municipality, and that we needed an unbiased source to help us identify those problems.

September of 2008 the plebiscite on the Crowsnest Centre took place. Obviously, there were some people that disagreed with that decision and the group "Citizens to save the Crowsnest Pass" formed which held some meeting and put out press releases and started a petition. The one mentioned previously that gained 1201 signatures. Now when council received the letter from Municipal affairs at the May 5, 2009 council meeting stating that the petition was invalid.

The minister stated the following:  "However, I suggest that the municipality consider engaging a third party to conduct a review of the administrative and governance processes in place. The review presents an opportunity to evaluate the municipality's strengths and identify potentials for improvement."

At that point, the motion was made to approach George Cuff to conduct a corporate review.

The whole issue of a corporate review was a political battle within the council of the day, the minister's comments only reconfirmed the position the majority of council had taken seven months prior to the petition failing and three months prior to it even beginning. Prior to the petition even being conceived the majority of council had publicly taken a position that a corporate review was necessary and would have happened even without a petition. Therefore, to try to tie the two together is "misleading"

Then he states the following: "I will also say that I have received dozens and dozens of phone calls, emails, and face-to-face endorsements from residents that council should stick to its path because we are doing the right thing"

That sounds like the "silent majority thing again".

Picture this Calgary has roughly 900,000 eligible voters, what do you think the council in Calgary would say if a citizens group went out and signed up 475,000 names on a petition in less than three weeks. "The silent majority support us"?

He also states the following:

"Other residents told me that the petitioners said, “We need to get rid of all these newcomers” because it’s obviously the “newcomers” that are to blame for everything, not 30+ years of poor management".

First, you want to talk about a divisive comment, I have sat at ratepayers meeting and have seen people that have been here all their lives and other that have only been here for a few years. Same with the people going around with petitions.

This 30+ years of poor management crap is getting on my nerves, no question there has been some councils and administrations that have been stronger and done a better job than others do. Do I think there has been 30+ years of poor management? No

Petition Presented - CTV Lethbridge - Nov.02/12

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY-RvMhHNaM


Will the municipal affairs give any consideration to 2500 signatures or 53% of the voting public.

The silent majority are no longer silent.


This from Global TV in Lethbridge


It appears a group of southwest Albertans aren't getting the answer they wanted from the provincial government.

The Crowsnest Pass Ratepayers Association delivered a petition to the Alberta Legislature this week, calling for an intervention into the municipality's council and administration.

"Our petition is 2,500 strong," said Bill Kovach, president of the association, in Edmonton on Thursday. "It's a pretty healthy petition, people have said enough is enough."

Enough of poor expenditures, says the group.

The petition dates back to July, but organizers say it has gained strength since the Blairmore fire chief was dismissed in early October.

Minister Doug Griffiths has already responded to at least one individual. In a letter provided to Global News, Griffiths writes, "I respect the work that the Crowsnest Pass council and administration has done," adding he will, "continue to support their efforts to carry out their legislated responsibilities."

"That sounds very encouraging," said Bruce Decoux, the Crowsnest Pass mayor. "We trust the Minister to make the appropriate decision, and whatever decision he does make, we'll certainly abide by it."

Decoux says the petition concerns him, noting council has to re-clarify its vision. But he adds there is a large "silent majority" of residents in the Pass who support the municipality's work.

"We are, on a daily basis, encouraged by people that have written us private letters," said Decoux. "As far as we're concerned, we have received an immense amount of support."

The Crowsnest Pass Ratepayers Association worries that spending by the municipality can't be sustained in a community where the population is shrinking.

"It makes it very difficult for those of us left to pick up the costs," said Kovach.

Under the Municipal Government Act, Griffiths has 30 days to respond, at which point he can choose whether or not to intervene.
 

Read it on Global News: Global Lethbridge | Letter from Minister supports Crowsnest Pass council 

Rum Runner Days Getting the numbers

Barring another deferral Tuesday night (Nov 6) the public is finally going to have the numbers made available on what Rum Runner Days weekend cost us.
Just for a reminder and comparison purposes below are the numbers Councillor Saindon sent me back in the spring.

It will be very interesting to see how the final numbers come out and where council goes from here for next year.

With revenues of $160,500 and costs of $151,720.

Where does the revenue come from?

$16,000 cash on hand

$25,000 municipal soft costs

$50,000 Municipal contribution

$2,500 Carnival rides

$3,000 Business Licenses

$6,000 Vendor permits

$10,000 Camping

$1,500 Friday Night wine and arts

$2,000 Lions Club

$15,000 Saturday night concert

$2,500 Saturday night food and beverage

$15,000 Merchandise Sales

$2,500 Show and Shine revenue

$9,500 Parking and Shuttle Revenue

Total revenue $160,500

Where is the money spent?

$19,200 Municipal Staff costs

$6,600 Municipal Office

$3,000 Advertising

$3,500 Website design/modifications

$2,000 Promotion

$1,500 Wine and art night

$8,500 Saturday night concert

$3,000 Gazebo Park Entertainment

$3,500 Kids Show

$13,500 Stage Rental

$4,000 Show and Shine merchandise

$20,000 Merchandise Purchase Costs

$12,500 Washroom rentals

$4,000 Waste pickup and disposal

$1,500 Security Fencing

$2,500 Tent and Accessories

$20,000 Rcmp Policing

$15,000 Regional Peace Officers/Sheriff

$1,920 Bus Rentals

$1,500 Donation to Boys and Girls club

$1,500 Donation to Coleman Society

$1,500 Donation to Kanaskis Rodeo Assoc

$1,500 Donation to Quad Squad

Total Expenses $151,720

Ratepayers Petition Give the process a chance.

I am sure by now most people have read the response from municipal affairs to a friend of John’s after that individual had wrote a letter to Municipal affairs regarding the present situation in the Crowsnest Pass.

How will Municipal affairs respond to the concerns raised by residents of the Crowsnest Pass?

On an individual basis I expected nothing less than what you see in the letter on Mr Prince’s Blog. From my reading of the MGA there is no legal requirement for the minister to do anything unless the threshold of 20% is reached.

http://www.johnprince.ca/documents/Doug%20Griffiths.pdf

There is a difference between an individual complaint to Municipal Affairs and the petition that will be delivered to the minister’s office. First of all if Municipal affairs looked at what was going on in a community every time somebody complained they would need a staff of hundreds. That is why there is a process in place that requires a substantial number of voters to speak up before they do take a look at a municipality. Let’s face it even if one hundred individual complaints came from the Crowsnest Pass to the government that sounds like a lot but it’s less than two percent of the population.  

We all recognize that municipal politicians have to face the test of the public every three years, for the most part that process should be respected and it is. There are very rare occasions where governments do not represent the wishes or direction of the people that put them in office, at provincial and federal levels you have official oppositions to keep government accountable and to point out when they are misleading the voters.

In Alberta Municipal politics you do not have official oppositions to make government accountable, councils are made up of seven individuals that are suppose to have their own minds, be willing to speak up and represent all the members of their communities. Again for the most part this takes place but for when the system fails or a substantial part of public has a clear disagreement with the direction their community is being led, then under the MGA you have the right to start a petition. It is not an easy feat you must collect 20% of the populations signatures on a piece of paper in 30 days maximum.

Only then will you get municipal affairs to look at what’s going on in our community, first of all they will validate that you have 20% of the population, we all remember a petition failed previously because it could not reach that number. There will not be a problem there, with over  40% of the population signed in just 20 days. It would be hard to believe that just this fact alone would not catch the attention of Municipal Affairs. Then I believe they will take a closer look at what is going on here, I think they will talk to the Council, administration and the Ratepayers executive.

Will anything happen from there? That’s the million dollar question that only municipal affairs can answer. Is there any guarantee’s that Municipal affairs will do anything? None at all. I do know for sure that they will not look at our issues based on one or even a hundred taxpayers letters, complaints or phone calls.

If the petition fails, we could have done nothing but the people of the Crowsnest Pass choose to use part of the democratic process provided to them by the Alberta government under the MGA. "53% of the eligible voters choice to exercise that right" 

At a minimum to have 2500 people sign a petition in less than three weeks should send a message to somebody.