Running Wild Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 From the news. A lot of money but will be spread thin across Canada. Clement Launches National Trails Program Clement Launches National Trails ProgramParry Sound-Muskoka MP Tony Clement announced today the launch of the National Recreational Trails Program. Thanks to a partnership between the Government of Canada and the National Trails Coalition, $10 million will be available between 2014 and 2016 to help expand and rehabilitate Canada’s snowmobile, all-terrain vehicle and non-motorized trail system. According to Clement, the program is an investment in trail infrastructure, will encourage job creation, link communities and increase recreational opportunities for Canadians. Local trail organizations across Canada are invited to submit project proposals directly to the National Trails Coalition over the next 45 days for approval. Between 150 and 200 projects are expected to be supported across Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowchopper Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Wow that sounds great for the future of our sport. Hopefully the money will be spent wisely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sledjunk Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 This is the same money that was promised and discussed months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Yes and only $330,000 or thereabouts for OFSC projects and the Club/District has to put in 25% of the cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrummage Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 So, we DON'T want the money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbill Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 So, we DON'T want the money? the problem is finding the matching money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddydoo Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 "$330,000 or thereabouts" is not much for OFSC projects. Clubs will need to work more closely with volunteers/people that want to do the work/improvements at reasonable costs. Might be a change from the past. But it will have to happen for trails survive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 "$330,000 or thereabouts" is not much for OFSC projects. Clubs will need to work more closely with volunteers/people that want to do the work/improvements at reasonable costs. Might be a change from the past. But it will have to happen for trails survive. Not sure of how prevelant it is or is not however I have heard talk of sweetheart nepotism deals made by some clubs. Something to the effect of... my brother can put in that bridge for $X thousand. The assumption is made that it must be a good deal because it is someones brother. They don't validate the cost and go ahead. Too late someone realizes that it could have been done for considerably less by someone else. Really it boils down to due diligence in ensuring we are getting the best possible costs. What is becoming an increasingly common practice in business is to do reverse auction online bidding where the vendor gets the opportunity to revise their bid to a new lower number. i.e. You have 3 bidders. They can't see what the other has bid. Only their ranking. Someone sees they are number 2 and has the opportunity to sharpen their pencil and submits a new bid. They are now number 1. The auction runs for a set period of time, typically 20 to 30 mins. If someone submits a bid within the last few minutes of the auction it is extended another 5 mins to allow the others to respond. It is not always the lowest price that is awarded the business.It is often the overall value they bring as part of the deal relative to the cost. It has saved businesses signficant amounts of money rather than just taking the lowest of three initial paper bids. Perhaps there is an opportunity for the OFSC to adopt a similar process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbill Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 We must have a minimum of three bids for each project and scrutiny of the bids is thorough as it should be. It would be difficult to get away with crap now and the consequences of getting caught unpleasant to say the least Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 We must have a minimum of three bids for each project and scrutiny of the bids is thorough as it should be. It would be difficult to get away with crap now and the consequences of getting caught unpleasant to say the least But is there the opportunity for # 2 and # 3 to rebid knowing their ranking but not the value of the other bids. This could drive the price even lower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 "$330,000 or thereabouts" is not much for OFSC projects. Clubs will need to work more closely with volunteers/people that want to do the work/improvements at reasonable costs. Might be a change from the past. But it will have to happen for trails survive. And for a bridge you need a Hydrology Study, stamped engineering foundation design, stamped engineering structural design, likely and MNR Work Permit and a Conservation Authority Permit before you even make Application for the Grant. We just spent almost $10,000 just to get to the stage where we can Apply because you can't Apply for a Grant unless you have ALL the approvals in place in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddydoo Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 We must have a minimum of three bids for each project and scrutiny of the bids is thorough as it should be. It would be difficult to get away with crap now and the consequences of getting caught unpleasant to say the leastSo it would be difficult to get away with "crap now"? Good to hear we are moving in the right direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbill Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 So it would be difficult to get away with "crap now"? Good to hear we are moving in the right direction. I would think impossible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viperules700 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 the problem is finding the matching money Aren't there reserves that can be drawn from in each district for neccessary projects that come up? I know must clubs make sure there trail fund money is zero at the end of the season, so the district doesn't ask for it back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasquatch777 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 We need a bridge but cost is so high that even if someone else pays 75% we can't afford it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gator Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Aren't there reserves that can be drawn from in each district for neccessary projects that come up? I know must clubs make sure there trail fund money is zero at the end of the season, so the district doesn't ask for it back. Rumour has it that the southern clubs and districts have large cash reserves. It must be true with a comment like that. Pretty well all central and northern clubs/districts have no or very little reserve funds available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doogirl69 Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Rumour has it that the southern clubs and districts have large cash reserves. It must be true with a comment like that. Pretty well all central and northern clubs/districts have no or very little reserve funds available. Not a rumor its a fact. Lets see what happens this Winter when the South has no snow and they plan on riding North and nothing is groomed because of equipment that is not fixed and no funds for fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viperules700 Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 Rumour has it that the southern clubs and districts have large cash reserves. It must be true with a comment like that. Pretty well all central and northern clubs/districts have no or very little reserve funds available. Some districts do have reserves, no doubt about that. Some clubs here in the south have two bank accounts, one for trail money and another one that comes from thier own fundraising efforts, such as poker runs or wing nights that is used to maintain club houses. Ofsc states no trail money can be used for up keep and maintaince and or operating expenses related to club houses. I believe this rule change is a fairy recent change in the last 8 years or so. Some clubs have dropped club houses because fund raising efforts are time consuming and really heavily on the same volunteers. Most clubs make sure there trail bank accounts are zero at the end of the season to ensure district doesn't ask for it back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildman Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 Not a rumor its a fact. Lets see what happens this Winter when the South has no snow and they plan on riding North and nothing is groomed because of equipment that is not fixed and no funds for fuel. Since you seem to think you know so much, you would realize that your district gets an equalization payment, that is your operating money along with the permits you sell. With ffc you also get three payments based on submission of your groomer logs. Don't spew this crap that your hard done by, this is a provicial system and we are all working together. I don't cry because we sell 900 permits, keep $30 of each permit and get no equalization payment. It is what makes the system work. Does you club pay groomer operators? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildman Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 By the way, there is a groomer refurbishment program, quit posting usless crap and spend some time doing the necessary paperwork to get that funding to fix your broken equipment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gator Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 Since you seem to think you know so much, you would realize that your district gets an equalization payment, that is your operating money along with the permits you sell. With ffc you also get three payments based on submission of your groomer logs. Don't spew this crap that your hard done by, this is a provicial system and we are all working together. I don't cry because we sell 900 permits, keep $30 of each permit and get no equalization payment. It is what makes the system work. Does you club pay groomer operators? First of all it is 30% of permit sales and not $30. It is no wonder your district has a reserve if they are keeping the approx. 37% of permit sales they get back as an equalization fund. If you look at FFC the District is allowed to spend $30,000 of the equalization fund and the bulk of the fund is to be divided amongst the member clubs in a fair manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildman Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 First of all it is 30% of permit sales and not $30. It is no wonder your district has a reserve if they are keeping the approx. 37% of permit sales they get back as an equalization fund. If you look at FFC the District is allowed to spend $30,000 of the equalization fund and the bulk of the fund is to be divided amongst the member clubs in a fair manner. You are correct, 30%. I don't understand where you get 37% for equalization. District 5 does not recieve equalization payments. We get our 30% of each permit sold and 3 payments based off grooming hours. Do you really think that is unfair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbill Posted August 9, 2014 Share Posted August 9, 2014 them and us is not constructive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sledjunk Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 them and us is not constructive X2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Posted August 10, 2014 Share Posted August 10, 2014 them and us is not constructive We are eating our own. Us vs them is in the past unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.