Grooming Program Managment Study.

[2bsledding]

To justify this proposal on the basis of 'it will be easier', under a law that has not yet been proclaimed, is hasty. 

 

NFP legislation is not expected to be proclaimed before 2016. 

 

Existing NFP's will have 3 years to transition.

 

http://www.sse.gov.on.ca/mcs/en/Pages/Not_For_Profit.aspx

 

The proposed NFP legislation is not the issue here.

OFSC is only talking about the disadvantages of Bill 65. There are positives to Ontario's New Not-For-Profit Corporations Act that they are forgetting to mention. If you want a good analysis of the new Act, google "Analysis of Ontario Bill 65 by David Tang".     

There could have been another option and that is assistance program / plan could be be developed to assist clubs with the NEW Act. They have 3 years to do it. Why not look at that avenue? 

[bbakernbay]

We should be dealing solely with how to fund new groomers and secondly how to rationalize the number of groomers overall.

Each District can decide for themselves on how best to groom.

Forget the NFP legislation for a year or so until it comes into effect, if ever.

Leave the Clubs alone at this time, don't piss off the Volunteers carrying the load now.

Locked in funds by Districts or Clubs will gradually be used up when that Club or District applies for a new Groomer and the ability to pay is looked at carefully.

Lastly get the Province and OPP to work with our Trail Patrol whereby charges are easily laid against the OWNERS of freeloading sleds.

This proposal is too much in too short a time with major consequences of gutting Clubs autonomy.

[PISTON LAKE CRUISER]

The BOG or the Clubs didn't come up with any of this. All the recommendations came from the OFSC for the BOG to approve. The old boy's in the BOG are Sheep and do whatever the OFSC wants. Some of the newer Governors don't have any say and get voted down. Its a top down process.

Opinion or fact???

[bbakernbay]

Well I'm sure we can eliminate the Clubs.

[Wildbill]

2 to3 hours for business should be lots right? 

[Yukon]

2 to3 hours for business should be lots right?

How long does take it or leave it take?

[Wildbill]

How long does take it or leave it take?

this could be interesting 

[Doogirl69]

Opinion or fact???

 

Yup.

[PISTON LAKE CRUISER]

Yup.

That's what I thought

[sledjunk]

At our district meeting last night, we were told that there should be an update coming out on Friday.  The motion will be for the board to investigate an implementation schedule to be approved at next year's AGM.  However, they are still going ahead with the plan to eliminate the clubs as PSE's and as having any financial control.

 

I do not see how this will reduce costs as club volunteers will be replaced by paid district staff.

 

Oh well, it was fun.

[Big Pete]

Sledjunk, here is what we got from our District Governor this morning which mirrors what you heard at your District meeting. The changes only delay MOTS by a few months but be assured the end point for the OFSC has not changed.

 

I hope your comment "Oh well it was fun" is not a sign that you have given up. It will be incumbent on every permit buyer to contact their club and voice their opposition to this ill-conceived plan. I might even suggest an email to the OFSC saying No to MOTS.,

 

• The MOTS Proposal will be voted on as a strategy only to start this season and full implementation will evolve over this season to allow for a full implementation plan to be developed and presented for next AGM 2016.
• The requirement to have all Districts Immediately be required to handle all Administration will be removed but those that wish to, or already do so, can proceed. The districts will be encouraged to start the development of coordinated grooming operations and identifying where savings can be delivered, at the same time the provincial organization will secure the appropriate resources to both develop the provincial program and provide support to the districts.
• The By-Law change to allow for Members who are not incorporated will be voted upon separately from MOTS at AGM.
• The different rates for day and night grooming have been removed and the Districts will be allowed to make their own local decisions and encourage their desired outcomes

[Nutter]

At our district meeting last night, we were told that there should be an update coming out on Friday.  The motion will be for the board to investigate an implementation schedule to be approved at next year's AGM.  However, they are still going ahead with the plan to eliminate the clubs as PSE's and as having any financial control.

 

I do not see how this will reduce costs as club volunteers will be replaced by paid district staff.

 

Oh well, it was fun.

 

Dave our districts has one of the highest admin cost in the province, why when we only have Sandra handling the dist admin duties at the cost of the dist delivery of service ? ...... because of the duplication costs each club is putting out for their own admin and their operations, the savings to afford more paid staff if we can't find volunteers to take on the extra work will come with consolidation of admin and some operational aspects. If we can find volunteers to do some of great, if not then there will be less volunteer burden.

 

Just the annual cost of 11+ bank accounts alone is enough to fuel a groomer for 2 weeks, add in what some of our dist clubs claim for mailing, office equip, volunteer mileage chits for admin duties ... ect, and you now are fueling a groomer for the whole season. 

 

 

 

Sledjunk, here is what we got from our District Governor this morning which mirrors what you heard at your District meeting. The changes only delay MOTS by a few months but be assured the end point for the OFSC has not changed.

 

I hope your comment "Oh well it was fun" is not a sign that you have given up. It will be incumbent on every permit buyer to contact their club and voice their opposition to this ill-conceived plan. I might even suggest an email to the OFSC saying No to MOTS.,

 

• The MOTS Proposal will be voted on as a strategy only to start this season and full implementation will evolve over this season to allow for a full implementation plan to be developed and presented for next AGM 2016.
• The requirement to have all Districts Immediately be required to handle all Administration will be removed but those that wish to, or already do so, can proceed. The districts will be encouraged to start the development of coordinated grooming operations and identifying where savings can be delivered, at the same time the provincial organization will secure the appropriate resources to both develop the provincial program and provide support to the districts.
• The By-Law change to allow for Members who are not incorporated will be voted upon separately from MOTS at AGM.
• The different rates for day and night grooming have been removed and the Districts will be allowed to make their own local decisions and encourage their desired outcomes

 

 

 

What makes you think every permit buyer is against this plan ?  99.9% of all permit buyers don't care who writes the checks to pay for groomer fuel, or who decides what brand of groomer fuel filter is to be purchased or where it's purchased from, they just want trails made smooth to ride on with the equipment they paid for with their permit dollars, and right now that is not happening as well as it can be, it's seen as soon as a rider crosses that imaginary boundary line from one club to another. District clubs working as one will provide that to the permit buyer that buys the groomers and fuels them. 

[sledjunk]

 

Sledjunk, here is what we got from our District Governor this morning which mirrors what you heard at your District meeting. The changes only delay MOTS by a few months but be assured the end point for the OFSC has not changed.

 

I hope your comment "Oh well it was fun" is not a sign that you have given up. It will be incumbent on every permit buyer to contact their club and voice their opposition to this ill-conceived plan. I might even suggest an email to the OFSC saying No to MOTS.,

 

• The MOTS Proposal will be voted on as a strategy only to start this season and full implementation will evolve over this season to allow for a full implementation plan to be developed and presented for next AGM 2016.
• The requirement to have all Districts Immediately be required to handle all Administration will be removed but those that wish to, or already do so, can proceed. The districts will be encouraged to start the development of coordinated grooming operations and identifying where savings can be delivered, at the same time the provincial organization will secure the appropriate resources to both develop the provincial program and provide support to the districts.
• The By-Law change to allow for Members who are not incorporated will be voted upon separately from MOTS at AGM.
• The different rates for day and night grooming have been removed and the Districts will be allowed to make their own local decisions and encourage their desired outcomes

 

I am curious as to how they can propose a by-law change in contravention of the by-laws.  (see 22F)  We were assures that only an implementation plan would evolve over the next year with consultation with districts and would be presented at next year's AGM.  Too much doubletalk and misinformation, IMO.

 

I haven't quite given up, but might well be done if it passes this AGM.

[sledjunk]

Dave our districts has one of the highest admin cost in the province, why when we only have Sandra handling the dist admin duties at the cost of the dist delivery of service ? ...... because of the duplication costs each club is putting out for their own admin and their operations, the savings to afford more paid staff if we can't find volunteers to take on the extra work will come with consolidation of admin and some operational aspects. If we can find volunteers to do some of great, if not then there will be less volunteer burden.

 

Just the annual cost of 11+ bank accounts alone is enough to fuel a groomer for 2 weeks, add in what some of our dist clubs claim for mailing, office equip, volunteer mileage chits for admin duties ... ect, and you now are fueling a groomer for the whole season. 

 

I don't know where you get your figures, or what other clubs are rolling into bank charges.  Our bank charges last year were less than $300.  The only way that will fuel a groomer for 2 weeks is if it doesn't move for 13 of those days.  If the other clubs are rolling Credit card charges into that account, then those figures would not be reduced by amalgamation, and are offset by the fullfilment allowance for the permit type.  Volunteer mileage for administration is mostly traveling to our permit vendors to set them up and pick up receipts.  How would that be reduced?

 

There are opportunities to reduce costs and become more efficient, but IMO, throwing the clubs under the bus is not acceptable or necessary.  I know there are a number of grooming associations in the province, but AFAIK, none of them have totally removed the revenue stream or eliminated the autonomy or decision making ability of the clubs.

 

 

 

What makes you think every permit buyer is against this plan ?  99.9% of all permit buyers don't care who writes the checks to pay for groomer fuel, or who decides what brand of groomer fuel filter is to be purchased or where it's purchased from, they just want trails made smooth to ride on with the equipment they paid for with their permit dollars, and right now that is not happening as well as it can be, it's seen as soon as a rider crosses that imaginary boundary line from one club to another. District clubs working as one will provide that to the permit buyer that buys the groomers and fuels them. 

[Nutter]

 

Dave our districts has one of the highest admin cost in the province, why when we only have Sandra handling the dist admin duties at the cost of the dist delivery of service ? ...... because of the duplication costs each club is putting out for their own admin and their operations, the savings to afford more paid staff if we can't find volunteers to take on the extra work will come with consolidation of admin and some operational aspects. If we can find volunteers to do some of great, if not then there will be less volunteer burden.

 

Just the annual cost of 11+ bank accounts alone is enough to fuel a groomer for 2 weeks, add in what some of our dist clubs claim for mailing, office equip, volunteer mileage chits for admin duties ... ect, and you now are fueling a groomer for the whole season. 

 

I don't know where you get your figures, or what other clubs are rolling into bank charges.  Our bank charges last year were less than $300.  The only way that will fuel a groomer for 2 weeks is if it doesn't move for 13 of those days.  If the other clubs are rolling Credit card charges into that account, then those figures would not be reduced by amalgamation, and are offset by the fullfilment allowance for the permit type.  Volunteer mileage for administration is mostly traveling to our permit vendors to set them up and pick up receipts.  How would that be reduced?

 

There are opportunities to reduce costs and become more efficient, but IMO, throwing the clubs under the bus is not acceptable or necessary.  I know there are a number of grooming associations in the province, but AFAIK, none of them have totally removed the revenue stream or eliminated the autonomy or decision making ability of the clubs.

 

 

 

What makes you think every permit buyer is against this plan ?  99.9% of all permit buyers don't care who writes the checks to pay for groomer fuel, or who decides what brand of groomer fuel filter is to be purchased or where it's purchased from, they just want trails made smooth to ride on with the equipment they paid for with their permit dollars, and right now that is not happening as well as it can be, it's seen as soon as a rider crosses that imaginary boundary line from one club to another. District clubs working as one will provide that to the permit buyer that buys the groomers and fuels them. 

 

 

 

Dave 11 clubs spending just shy of $300 annually for banking is over $3k, which will more then run a groomer for 2 weeks. Our club banks for less then $200 a season ?? .....  there is a perfect example of inconsistency and waste of permit buyers dollars, that can be alleviated through consolidation. 

 

 

Online sales only coupled with live Service Canada Kiosk sales would completely get rid of having to waste dollars and volunteer time distributing and reconciling. Not to mention the losses we've seen over the years by largely un-accountable change of hands of cash and permits, and losses from bad book keeping at vendors and clubs. Last season I know of one dealer going bankrupt with a very very large amount of permit revenue, the club was so low on the trustee's list they saw nil when the business was liquidated. 

[Nutter]

I also would like to add that this will provide full transparency within districts, I'm sure every club wants to know how their fellow dist clubs are spending permit buyers dollars, especially when it comes to operational inconsistencies. If a neighboring clubs trails are junk and they are claiming they have no money, we can help them if we can see how they are spending what they do have. 

[Doogirl69]

Dave 11 clubs spending just shy of $300 annually for banking is over $3k, which will more then run a groomer for 2 weeks. Our club banks for less then $200 a season ?? .....  there is a perfect example of inconsistency and waste of permit buyers dollars, that can be alleviated through consolidation. 

 

 

Online sales only coupled with live Service Canada Kiosk sales would completely get rid of having to waste dollars and volunteer time distributing and reconciling. Not to mention the losses we've seen over the years by largely un-accountable change of hands of cash and permits, and losses from bad book keeping at vendors and clubs. Last season I know of one dealer going bankrupt with a very very large amount of permit revenue, the club was so low on the trustee's list they saw nil when the business was liquidated. 

 

Our Club's Royal Bank account bank fees are $3.75 per month. $45 per year.

[bbakernbay]

All District 11 Clubs were given a comprehensive financial analysis for each Club including permit sales & revenues, Equalization Transfers and their costs of Grooming, Trails and Admin. Also included 4 year averages. Our DG also provided additional commentary.

It is quite eye opening to see some major differences in spending on Admin especially but as always until you look into each one a little further, you may not be comparing apples to apples.

Nevertheless, the financial numbers are published for analysis, discussion and probably decision making.

As an example, are the group of clubs in a District going to be willing to help a Club that has very high administration costs without more questions being asked.

I think we are on the right track, our DG says there will be a slowdown in implementation this year if approved at AGM.

Difference in night versus day grooming has been eliminated unless Clubs in the District decide otherwise.

I still maintain the Province has got to step up in several ways, $$$ plus some changes in Act to facilitate easier enforcement of freeloaders and hopefully do something to reduce insurance liability claims and Val Tag revenue.

I have little hope that any of these will receive any action by this government. They spend nearly 2 billion a year on losses in selling surplus green energy but can't support a sport/industry that has proven to put major $$ in tax revenues and in the pockets of small and large service providers all over the province. Pathetic really.

[Big Pete]

I am curious as to how they can propose a by-law change in contravention of the by-laws. (see 22F) We were assures that only an implementation plan would evolve over the next year with consultation with districts and would be presented at next year's AGM. Too much doubletalk and misinformation, IMO.

I haven't quite given up, but might well be done if it passes this AGM.

Sled junk, I have email correspondence from the OGSC executive director today confirming the by-law changes for MOTS will be presented to delegates for voting at AGM. When I pointed out the rules in Article 22f his response was they have their legal opinion that everything is permissible and if we want to challenge them go ahead. I have requested authorization from our club to seek an independent opinion and am awaiting approval. He said that the exact wording was deliberately withheld from the AGM package it was being worked on based on input from all district sessions. My response to him was that to meet the requiremts of 22f they should have put what ever they had in the package to meet the 30 day notice requirements. Then as a properly presented motion amdments could be considered by the delegates So we will see where this lands. Even if the OFSC is correct in their legal position, I don't think it's ethical to deliberately withhold information from the delegates.

[Big Pete]

Our Club's Royal Bank account bank fees are $3.75 per month. $45 per year.

Our all in bank fees for the last 2 years is $101 total at BMO

[bbakernbay]

in my opinion the MOTS proposal will ultimately require a paid District Operations Manager and most likely all paid Groomer Operators.

 

Whether this is affordable and improves the trails significantly enough to warrant the extra costs is open for debate.

 

Whether there is offsetting savings by reducing Club Admin costs by funnelling everything through the District is also debatable.

 

To generate the absolute necessity of acquiring more groomers can only come from increased user fees (Trail Permits) and increased government investment.

 

We likely need to reduce the kilometres of trails by 10% or thereabouts.

 

Difficult decisions to be made by all of us for sure.

[Big Pete]

Brian, I think you only scratched the surface. I can see districts having to pay to have trails signed and brushed or bridges repaired or the multitude of other things that volunteers are now doing at no cost.

We already know that permit buyers are price sensitive so there not a lot of upside there. And I am not holdings breath waiting for the govt to pony up a whole bunch of money.

So the only other options are 1) be more efficient which I believe has some opportunity and/or 2) reduce the operation to match available funds. The only problem with option 2 is that as you reduce the trail network you run the risk of losing permit buyers. It also exacerbates the price sensitivity. As there is less and less product available buyers will not willing to pay as much.

Personally I don't think MOTS all achieve its goals in the long run and yes there are lot of tough decisions to be made.

[Wildbill]

All District 11 Clubs were given a comprehensive financial analysis for each Club including permit sales & revenues, Equalization Transfers and their costs of Grooming, Trails and Admin. Also included 4 year averages. Our DG also provided additional commentary.

It is quite eye opening to see some major differences in spending on Admin especially but as always until you look into each one a little further, you may not be comparing apples to apples.

Nevertheless, the financial numbers are published for analysis, discussion and probably decision making.

As an example, are the group of clubs in a District going to be willing to help a Club that has very high administration costs without more questions being asked.

I think we are on the right track, our DG says there will be a slowdown in implementation this year if approved at AGM.

Difference in night versus day grooming has been eliminated unless Clubs in the District decide otherwise.

I still maintain the Province has got to step up in several ways, $$$ plus some changes in Act to facilitate easier enforcement of freeloaders and hopefully do something to reduce insurance liability claims and Val Tag revenue.

I have little hope that any of these will receive any action by this government. They spend nearly 2 billion a year on losses in selling surplus green energy but can't support a sport/industry that has proven to put major $$ in tax revenues and in the pockets of small and large service providers all over the province. Pathetic really.

 The accounting on admin cost is questionable at best . A transfer payment made from the OFS to the District then transferred to an association that performs the functions tasks is counted twice thus inflating the figures 

[Wildbill]

Dave 11 clubs spending just shy of $300 annually for banking is over $3k, which will more then run a groomer for 2 weeks. Our club banks for less then $200 a season ?? .....  there is a perfect example of inconsistency and waste of permit buyers dollars, that can be alleviated through consolidation. 

 

 

Online sales only coupled with live Service Canada Kiosk sales would completely get rid of having to waste dollars and volunteer time distributing and reconciling. Not to mention the losses we've seen over the years by largely un-accountable change of hands of cash and permits, and losses from bad book keeping at vendors and clubs. Last season I know of one dealer going bankrupt with a very very large amount of permit revenue, the club was so low on the trustee's list they saw nil when the business was liquidated. 

Does the srvice provider not charge us for this task ? I remember a permit fulfillment budget line 

[Nutter]

Clubs simply have to stop thinking what will my club get and realize it's what will the permit buyer who pays the bills will get that matters. We all know the permit buyer wants one thing and that's safe, smooth well maintained trails to ride on, and clubs sitting on money and under utilized equipment that could be better utilized provincialy through district consolidation will help provide that. How do you explain to a rider riding over 2ft moguls that the club who's trails he's riding on is low on funds and has an older groomer but the neighboring club has $110,000 in the bank and 2 fairly new groomers and say we don't need to consolidate operations ?