More On The Snow

[sledjunk]

I've finished reading the mots documents, in preparation for this Thursday's District 10 / District 7 meeting with OFSC.

 

I am impressed with the degree of thought and professionalism apparent in the materials.

 

They have always been great wordsmiths and salesmen.  Just sayin'

[Faceman]

SJ. Last year we gave them permission to come up with a plan, correct?? And now they have one. I have a page and a half of questions and/or comments regarding the MOTS document which I have read in detail ( lav material) We need to do something. Make this our own, change it or propose as we want, get it so its acceptable.

[sledjunk]

SJ. Last year we gave them permission to come up with a plan, correct?? And now they have one. I have a page and a half of questions and/or comments regarding the MOTS document which I have read in detail ( lav material) We need to do something. Make this our own, change it or propose as we want, get it so its acceptable.

I can agree with that.  However, I think it will be an uphill battle to get major changes to this and to the implementation schedule.  Time will tell and I think it will be a lively AGM.  I certainly hope that there are suggestions that are adopted and that it is a true meeting of the minds.  I must say, though, that I have not seen much of an open attitude since the year that the recommended changes to the matrix was voted down by the membership.  Since then, it seems like the only proposal allowed to be discussed was the Board approved one and no amendments were allowed on the floor.  That is how Framework for Control was passed and how almost everything has gone since.  If you recall, last year, the carrot was the 16 new goomers that would only be purchased if, and only if, MOTS was accepted.  I expect that the same conditions will be put on the 18 tractors this year.

[Faceman]

They can shove the new tractors up their collective....Any district who is willing to contribute and flow with their replacement plan should be allow the decision ( my #1 question) .Numbers speak for themselves on pricing. Re-alignments need to happen but on a better time table. This hiring a bunch of people to implement this is crazy, dollars are coming from the infrastructure pot. The plan is solid, the presentation sucks.

"Push a mule you get kicked, lead and feed and you have a friend for life" :Who still will kick you I might add"!

[Panther340]

O2 Lets be realistic .....your comparison of the random infrastructure that your tax dollars support where you will never use , it is a pittance in comparison to the direct increase costs if val tags were raised substantially for non organized snowmobile owners. I would hazard a guess that your own annual Ontario tax dollars paid would contain maybe 20 cents towards the Trent Lock system. (your analogy)

Meanwhile raising the Val Tags $20 (or even $50 or $100) if trail permits part of val tag) is 100 times more. But what you fail to remember is my Ontrio tax dollar already contains a percentage going towards OFSC sport. So you want me to increase that by 100 times or more because some trail riders in your sport do not want to pay more than the magic number ceiling of $200 permits. Me thinks the OFSC should do a better job of explaining what a good deal the $200 permit is and that way the extra $10 or $20 they don't want to pay doesn't have to come from my pocket and all the other non OFSC snowmobile owners . That on top of the already willingly paid taxes we pay to support your sport because of some good tourist impact .

[02Sled]

O2 Lets be realistic .....your comparison of the random infrastructure that your tax dollars support where you will never use , it is a pittance in comparison to the direct increase costs if val tags were raised substantially for non organized snowmobile owners. I would hazard a guess that your own annual Ontario tax dollars paid would contain maybe 20 cents towards the Trent Lock system. (your analogy)

Meanwhile raising the Val Tags $20 (or even $50 or $100) if trail permits part of val tag) is 100 times more. But what you fail to remember is my Ontrio tax dollar already contains a percentage going towards OFSC sport. So you want me to increase that by 100 times or more because some trail riders in your sport do not want to pay more than the magic number ceiling of $200 permits. Me thinks the OFSC should do a better job of explaining what a good deal the $200 permit is and that way the extra $10 or $20 they don't want to pay doesn't have to come from my pocket and all the other non OFSC snowmobile owners . That on top of the already willingly paid taxes we pay to support your sport because of some good tourist impact .

 

The province has on occasion provided financial support in the form of a grant but that is not a guaranteed event and doesn't always happen. Typically I believe those irregular grants I believe have targeted specific things the money is to be spent on such as trail improvements which not only benefit the snowmobilers but those who use the trails in the off season yet don't contribute financially to their maintenance.

 

The grant monies I believe are applied for much like all the other grants the province gives to small business, sports clubs, amateur theatre groups and so much more. The Trent Severn Waterway by the way is federal money rather than provincial but still comes out of taxpayer pockets.

 

If you would like an analogy of one where I pay substantial amounts of money, far more than I pay for a trail permit how about the education taxes I pay but don't, won't ever use. We pay 3 sets of education tax. It would be nice if they would at least limit it to you only pay one set of education taxes on the highest assessed property. Could we make the education system a user pay system. Colleges and universities receive substantial provincial funding and have a partial user pay. What percentage of students are able to or do get a university or college education even though their parents tax $'s subsidize it.

 

Ontario snowmobilers contribute a $1.7B economic impact to the province each winter. I am confident that a good portion of that money is actually what keeps a lot of small town service industry businesses alive and avoiding shutting down. How may of the small town restaurants, gas stations, resorts could actually survive financially without those $'s.

 

The point is that there are lots of things that I will never use but pay for in municipal, provincial, federal taxes, levies etc. What should we make totally user pay and what shouldn't be.

 

I wonder how much my taxes, levies would go down if I didn't have to pay for the TTC, the libraries, the public pools, and so much more.

 

Southern Ontario taxpayers I would suggest pay the lions share of roads maintenance that happens in Northern Ontario. I don't believe that the Northern Ontario population contribute through their reduced licence fees and other tax $'s earmarked for provincial roads maintenance to cover the costs of maintaining the roads they use. Should we make all roads toll roads and the tolls for each road reflect the actual cost of maintenance distributed by those who actually use it.

 

It's just the reality that the vast majority of those who would be able to ride a snowmobile without finding themselves on an OFSC trail are in Northern Ontario as there just isn't that much you can do in i.e. Muskoka that doesn't involve private property. So really you are looking at the concern of people in Northern Ontario subsidising Ontario trails some of you will never use.  

 

I haven't any problem paying for the education system, the roads etc. It is just the way it is. Otherwise I should be upset at the $500 I just shelled out to the province for the renewal of my drivers licence and the 2 year tags for our two vehicles and two sleds.

 

It has been suggested / reported that the Saskatchewan trail system was saved from collapse by the val tag being the trail permit. What would be the impact here? I don't know. I'm just not prepared to dismiss the concept of the val tag to appease a very small number of people who already don't pay for a snowmobile val tag.

 

 

 

 

 

It's just the way it is.

[Wildman]

LOL

[02Sled]

LOL

 

Just being a devils advocate pointing out there is an endless supply of things that we pay for but will never use through government funding / programs.

[02Sled]

Remind me not to poke 02Sled, now that he's retired and has a little extra time to put his thoughts to the keyboard. ROTFL

At home killing time waiting for a between 8 & 4 delivery

[Viperules700]

At home killing time waiting for a between 8 & 4 delivery

Well I would leave at 8:30 and come back home at 4:00. Just tell them you were told 8 or 4. Next time they will give you an actual time to do the re delivery.

[Wildman]

Just being a devils advocate pointing out there is an endless supply of things that we pay for but will never use through government funding / programs.

I'm just laughing at the whole debate, I don't see anything becoming of the whole deal, whether it should er shouldn't is moot at best. Carry on and have fun with it though.

[volunteer2]

It's already five minutes before twelf o'clock. The OFSC has already started with the implementation of MOTS on August 1. The clubs need to make a budget how much money the need for opening trails, trail work and so on. This budget need to get approved by the district and if approved, it can do the tasks they need to do. Don't think thT the district will give thousands of dollars for land owner préciation. Last year at the Agm, it's delayed with one year, that will not happen again.

All assets of the clubs will go to the districts, groomers, atvs, clubhouses, shops and tools, chainsaws, bank accounts and so on. Then some assets will given back to clubs as chain saws, most likely.

The district is responsible for groomer maintenance and a groomer schedule. It's possible that a unknown groomer operator will groom your club trails with the old groomer from your neighbor's club, while your old groomer is grooming 200 km away. Grooming and maintenance isn't anymore a club responsibility.

How this will go, not sure.... If the district have he ducks in a row and grooming is going well, it will go well. If not, it can become a mess.....

Lets get back on topic    After last nights road show    Greggie is right!!

[Wildman]

So, there are many reasons I don't support MOTS, first and foremost, it is not right for every district,, much less many districts. It works for D5 right now, these policies being handed down would work for us right now......the future, who knows, possibly not. D5 has been aligned for this though, most of the province hasn't been, I understand and accept that, it makes sense that it won't work for the majority and I pray for the sport of snowmobiling in Ontario that, that is reflected in the vote at AGM. Now with that being said, "if amendments can be made and voted on, and the policy be changed to be reasonable", then by all means it could be made so every district could make it work.

I don't buy into the paid Liason theory, we are not even close to that working for our federation as it stands right now, of course this is just my personal opinion and I represent no club/district or organization with any of my opinions.

[Wildman]

Might wanna work on the fine but bold print at the bottom as well, huh, V2!!!!!!!! LOL

[Greggie]

District 1 had last week the OFSC info session and there weren't much clubs and volunteers telling the OFSC their concerns. There are more and more clubs willing to try it out. Also some clubs/districts are voting in favor to get their new groomer. I know there are here several people who want to hear this but this is the status for this moment.

[Wildman]

Sounds like they should cancel agm then, and buy another groomer n a half

[Greggie]

Sounds like they should cancel agm then, and buy another groomer n a half

Wildman,

It seems that you don't like me and for sure don't like to hear what I am saying on this forum. As I said earlier, I am telling what is going on and if you don't want to hear it, please don't reply with comments what makes no sense. Others like to read me comments...

[FreezerBurnt]

The Trail Permit is a Ministry of Transportation issued permit so that does make it government program. Any changes to the price of the permit have to be approved by the Ministry. We also have the Trent Severn Waterway and Rideau Canals as a parallel example. They are heavily subsidized by tax $'s and Part of Parks Canada. Every Canadian, not just those in Ontario pays for them and users pay a small portion of their operating cost.

 

 

Not even remotely the same

[FreezerBurnt]

The province has on occasion provided financial support in the form of a grant but that is not a guaranteed event and doesn't always happen. Typically I believe those irregular grants I believe have targeted specific things the money is to be spent on such as trail improvements which not only benefit the snowmobilers but those who use the trails in the off season yet don't contribute financially to their maintenance.

 

The grant monies I believe are applied for much like all the other grants the province gives to small business, sports clubs, amateur theatre groups and so much more. The Trent Severn Waterway by the way is federal money rather than provincial but still comes out of taxpayer pockets.

 

If you would like an analogy of one where I pay substantial amounts of money, far more than I pay for a trail permit how about the education taxes I pay but don't, won't ever use. We pay 3 sets of education tax. It would be nice if they would at least limit it to you only pay one set of education taxes on the highest assessed property. Could we make the education system a user pay system. Colleges and universities receive substantial provincial funding and have a partial user pay. What percentage of students are able to or do get a university or college education even though their parents tax $'s subsidize it.

 

Ontario snowmobilers contribute a $1.7B economic impact to the province each winter. I am confident that a good portion of that money is actually what keeps a lot of small town service industry businesses alive and avoiding shutting down. How may of the small town restaurants, gas stations, resorts could actually survive financially without those $'s.

 

The point is that there are lots of things that I will never use but pay for in municipal, provincial, federal taxes, levies etc. What should we make totally user pay and what shouldn't be.

 

I wonder how much my taxes, levies would go down if I didn't have to pay for the TTC, the libraries, the public pools, and so much more.

 

Southern Ontario taxpayers I would suggest pay the lions share of roads maintenance that happens in Northern Ontario. I don't believe that the Northern Ontario population contribute through their reduced licence fees and other tax $'s earmarked for provincial roads maintenance to cover the costs of maintaining the roads they use. Should we make all roads toll roads and the tolls for each road reflect the actual cost of maintenance distributed by those who actually use it.

 

It's just the reality that the vast majority of those who would be able to ride a snowmobile without finding themselves on an OFSC trail are in Northern Ontario as there just isn't that much you can do in i.e. Muskoka that doesn't involve private property. So really you are looking at the concern of people in Northern Ontario subsidising Ontario trails some of you will never use.  

 

I haven't any problem paying for the education system, the roads etc. It is just the way it is. Otherwise I should be upset at the $500 I just shelled out to the province for the renewal of my drivers licence and the 2 year tags for our two vehicles and two sleds.

 

It has been suggested / reported that the Saskatchewan trail system was saved from collapse by the val tag being the trail permit. What would be the impact here? I don't know. I'm just not prepared to dismiss the concept of the val tag to appease a very small number of people who already don't pay for a snowmobile val tag.

 

 

 

 

 

It's just the way it is.

again

 

OFSC TRAILS ARE A USER PAY SYSTEM for people that use the trails

 

You use you pay

 

You can NOT compare provincial ran programs to the OFSC

[02Sled]

again

OFSC TRAILS ARE A USER PAY SYSTEM for people that use the trails

You use you pay

You can NOT compare provincial ran programs to the OFSC

Sure can compare them. The trail permit is a MTO permit that the province controls. Therefore a government program. Try changing the permit price without the Minister of Transportation signing off on that change. Won't happen

Then let's make all the other government recreational programs totally user pay as well.

Ice rinks, public pools, tennis courts, boat launch ramps and parking provided by townships and so much more. Lots of people pay for them and will never use them. You want to play hockey on a public rink how about paying the real cost for ice time

[soupkids]

Lets get back on topic    After last nights road show    Greggie is right!!

 

I can't get the gregie part to quote for me.

 

This is a perfect example of too much information at once, this part has NOTHING to do with MOTS.

This will ONLY come into effect if the government passes the legislation on the not for profit, non profit, whatever!!

 

 

Just to clarify this point once more "asset transfer" has NOTHING to do with MOTS.

 

Just to clarify my point above, I've been doing some reading on the MOTS document, very vague about a bunch of stuff.

here is one part regarding "club status" quoted directly from schedule D of the MOTS document.

 

"Under the proposed new provincial NFP corporations act there will be a requirement to file ‘Letters of Continuance’. These follow the already established federal requirements and it makes sense to ensure the selected district corporations meet the proposed new standards." 

 

 

This whole section should be for information ONLY.

If the proposed NFP act comes in to play then this becomes the working handbook of options for the clubs NOT BEFORE.

[soupkids]

Some more very interesting reading in MOTS.

 

1 club format - Chapter member.

 

Here is the very very basic idea ( much the way many clubs and districts operate now)

 

Chapter member - Strong club  (lots of members and volunteers, strong leadership) with property or large equipment - even under MOTS, nothing changes.

 

Other option - weak club (few of members and less volunteers, small leadership) with property or large equipment - they have the option to merge with the district and become a "club" in name only.

[Big Pete]

I can't get the gregie part to quote for me.

 

This is a perfect example of too much information at once, this part has NOTHING to do with MOTS.

This will ONLY come into effect if the government passes the legislation on the not for profit, non profit, whatever!!

 

 

Just to clarify this point once more "asset transfer" has NOTHING to do with MOTS.

 

Just to clarify my point above, I've been doing some reading on the MOTS document, very vague about a bunch of stuff.

here is one part regarding "club status" quoted directly from schedule D of the MOTS document.

 

"Under the proposed new provincial NFP corporations act there will be a requirement to file ‘Letters of Continuance’. These follow the already established federal requirements and it makes sense to ensure the selected district corporations meet the proposed new standards." 

 

 

This whole section should be for information ONLY.

If the proposed NFP act comes in to play then this becomes the working handbook of options for the clubs NOT BEFORE.

Soup, how can you say that MOTS has nothing to do with asset transfers. One of the pillars of MOTS is to reduce the layers of accountability for permit dollars from 3 (OFSC, District, Club) to 2 levels (OFSC, District). Since the clubs are no longer accountable for permit dollars (or assets acquired with permit dollars) these assets must be transferred to the District. This would include the club permit account, any investments (GICs or bank deposits) and equipment (groomers/drags/atv/utv/sleds/other small equipment) that were made using permit dollars. As I read the MOTS document if the club chooses not to transfer assets that were acquire through fundraising efforts then the operating costs of those assets (fuel/insurance/repairs) are not eligible for reimbursement from permit dollars even though those assets may be used in legitimate activities associated with permit dollars. So as I read it, if a club raised funds to buy a sled/atv for trail work, unless you list that asset on the District list, the club will have to fund any expenses for that asset from their own resources (ie fundraising). 

 

I would agree with you on this whole NFP legislation that the OFSC is simply trying to scare people with by only providing partial information. The new NFP Act was passed back in 2010 but it has never been proclaimed into law. Why? Because the government has received huge push back from the the whole sector as the new legislation imposes huge burdens on a lot of NFPs. So this legislation has been sitting in limbo for 6 years so who knows if this will ever be proclaimed into law. Does not appear to be high on the govt agenda what with green energy and carbon taxes and an exploding deficit to deal with. If anybody looks at the Ontario Govt website it states on Page 1 that the govt will provide at least 24 moths notice before proclaiming this act into law. And once proclaimed, there will be a 3 year transition period for organizations to comply. So we have until 2021 at the earliest to comply. In order to comply an entity will file "Letters of Continuance" which basically means they are transferring from the old legislation to the new legislation. I am intimately familiar with this execrise as District 1 has just completed the continuance process. If you recall, about 4-5 years ago there was a stink made at AGM that District 1 was incorporated under federal jusridiction and not provincial. We were told to change the incorporation or cease to be a member of the OFSC. So 3 years and approx $10k later we have finally received our provincial incorporation. The process was cumbersome because the feds had their new act in place years ago. So we had to "continue" from the old federal act to the new federal act before we could "continue" in the old provincial act. Once the new prov act is proclaimed we (and everybody else) will have to "continue" into the new provincial act. The forms are on the govt website and you can do it yourself which I would recommend unless you want to pay a lot of legal fees for some pretty basic paperwork.

[soupkids]

Soup, how can you say that MOTS has nothing to do with asset transfers. One of the pillars of MOTS is to reduce the layers of accountability for permit dollars from 3 (OFSC, District, Club) to 2 levels (OFSC, District). Since the clubs are no longer accountable for permit dollars (or assets acquired with permit dollars) these assets must be transferred to the District. This would include the club permit account, any investments (GICs or bank deposits) and equipment (groomers/drags/atv/utv/sleds/other small equipment) that were made using permit dollars. As I read the MOTS document if the club chooses not to transfer assets that were acquire through fundraising efforts then the operating costs of those assets (fuel/insurance/repairs) are not eligible for reimbursement from permit dollars even though those assets may be used in legitimate activities associated with permit dollars. So as I read it, if a club raised funds to buy a sled/atv for trail work, unless you list that asset on the District list, the club will have to fund any expenses for that asset from their own resources (ie fundraising). 

 

I would agree with you on this whole NFP legislation that the OFSC is simply trying to scare people with by only providing partial information. The new NFP Act was passed back in 2010 but it has never been proclaimed into law. Why? Because the government has received huge push back from the the whole sector as the new legislation imposes huge burdens on a lot of NFPs. So this legislation has been sitting in limbo for 6 years so who knows if this will ever be proclaimed into law. Does not appear to be high on the govt agenda what with green energy and carbon taxes and an exploding deficit to deal with. If anybody looks at the Ontario Govt website it states on Page 1 that the govt will provide at least 24 moths notice before proclaiming this act into law. And once proclaimed, there will be a 3 year transition period for organizations to comply. So we have until 2021 at the earliest to comply. In order to comply an entity will file "Letters of Continuance" which basically means they are transferring from the old legislation to the new legislation. I am intimately familiar with this execrise as District 1 has just completed the continuance process. If you recall, about 4-5 years ago there was a stink made at AGM that District 1 was incorporated under federal jusridiction and not provincial. We were told to change the incorporation or cease to be a member of the OFSC. So 3 years and approx $10k later we have finally received our provincial incorporation. The process was cumbersome because the feds had their new act in place years ago. So we had to "continue" from the old federal act to the new federal act before we could "continue" in the old provincial act. Once the new prov act is proclaimed we (and everybody else) will have to "continue" into the new provincial act. The forms are on the govt website and you can do it yourself which I would recommend unless you want to pay a lot of legal fees for some pretty basic paperwork.

I will be totally honest with you I have not read the whole document (working on it) and just skimmed the highlights.

Seeing as I am posting  at 7:20 am I am going to start reading page by page.

D 12 has their OFSC meeting at the end of the month so I am compiling a list of questions.

[sledjunk]

As I read the MOTS document if the club chooses not to transfer assets that were acquire through fundraising efforts then the operating costs of those assets (fuel/insurance/repairs) are not eligible for reimbursement from permit dollars even though those assets may be used in legitimate activities associated with permit dollars. So as I read it, if a club raised funds to buy a sled/atv for trail work, unless you list that asset on the District list, the club will have to fund any expenses for that asset from their own resources (ie fundraising). 

 

Under this scenario, I see this similar to using my own car for work.  I would have to maintain my car but would be allowed to claim a usage fee (mileage) for reimbursement.  So, if the club provided club owned ATV's or other equipment, they should be entitled to an hourly / daily or whatever allowance for that piece of equipment.  No different than renting a backhow, bobcat, etc.

 

Is this a reasonable assumption?

 

 

 

I would agree with you on this whole NFP legislation that the OFSC is simply trying to scare people with by only providing partial information. The new NFP Act was passed back in 2010 but it has never been proclaimed into law. Why? Because the government has received huge push back from the the whole sector as the new legislation imposes huge burdens on a lot of NFPs. So this legislation has been sitting in limbo for 6 years so who knows if this will ever be proclaimed into law. Does not appear to be high on the govt agenda what with green energy and carbon taxes and an exploding deficit to deal with. If anybody looks at the Ontario Govt website it states on Page 1 that the govt will provide at least 24 moths notice before proclaiming this act into law. And once proclaimed, there will be a 3 year transition period for organizations to comply. So we have until 2021 at the earliest to comply. In order to comply an entity will file "Letters of Continuance" which basically means they are transferring from the old legislation to the new legislation. I am intimately familiar with this execrise as District 1 has just completed the continuance process. If you recall, about 4-5 years ago there was a stink made at AGM that District 1 was incorporated under federal jusridiction and not provincial. We were told to change the incorporation or cease to be a member of the OFSC. So 3 years and approx $10k later we have finally received our provincial incorporation. The process was cumbersome because the feds had their new act in place years ago. So we had to "continue" from the old federal act to the new federal act before we could "continue" in the old provincial act. Once the new prov act is proclaimed we (and everybody else) will have to "continue" into the new provincial act. The forms are on the govt website and you can do it yourself which I would recommend unless you want to pay a lot of legal fees for some pretty basic paperwork.

 

Good information!!!  Thank you.