Recently, there has been interest in the Resort Municipality of Whistler's (RMOW's) media relations procedure and we felt that it was important to provide some background to ensure people have the facts.
As the municipal government, our goal and responsibility is to provide the media and residents with clear and consistent information so they can form their own opinions. Our community life survey confirms annually that the local newspapers are the primary way that Whistlerites like to receive information.
One role of our communications department is to facilitate media inquiries. This means taking and recording media calls, researching background and information requested by reporters, and putting requests through to the most appropriate council or staff members.
About 90 per cent of media request interviews with the mayor. One of the standard designated roles of any mayor is to act as the primary spokesperson for their municipality, although a news story also often requires a subject or technical expert such as a planner, project manager or financial representative. Councillors are also sought out by media for their comments. It is rare that media would not be directed to the person they requested for an interview.
As is evident in the Whistler newspapers most weeks of the year, a variety of staff and council members are quoted regarding many areas of municipal business, much of which has been presented or discussed publicly at a council meeting.
Nothing has changed in our media relations procedure. But one thing has changed - the number of media calls to the organization has skyrocketed. During the one-year countdown to the 2010 Olympic Winter Games, the mayor conducted 18 interviews in one week. With assistance in managing and scheduling the high volume of requests, local, regional and international media requests can be successfully fulfilled.
Some key questions:
Is the RMOW communications team playing a larger role in facilitating the increased number of requests? Yes. Are the mayor, council and staff representatives withholding information or responding to less media requests than before? No. Have councillors been told they cannot speak to the media? No. Is the RMOW able to respond to media in a timely manner? Yes. Do some requests take longer to respond to than we'd like? Yes. Does the mayor have a new cell phone? Yes. Is the policy at the RMOW unusual compared to most municipal governments or other organizations? No. Are questions and concerns from the media and the community of primary interest to RMOW council and staff? Yes. Will increased media coverage help communicate municipal affairs and build awareness of Whistler as a destination resort? Yes.
The communications team is part of the overall RMOW team who are working hard to ensure the media has the information they need to get news stories out to the community. If you'd like to know more about this, or any aspect of the municipality, please contact us, come out to a twice-monthly council meeting or check our website at whistler.ca.
Bill Barratt
Chief Administrative Officer
RMOW
It keeps getting worse
It was back to the future night for me at the gathering orchestrated by the muni to explain their proposed 20 per cent property tax increase over the next three years. I had this vision that the flat earth society had taken over my junior high school and despite intelligent comment and questions coming from the audience those on stage weren't listening and were treating us like a bunch of unworldly Grade 8s who had their minds made up.
By representing themselves as a spendthrift group over the last five years the muni felt they were more than justified, based on a rather dubious telephone survey, to foist a tax grab on us. Another part of their justifi-confiscation was attributed to a so-called blue ribbon committee of financial experts who approved their recommendations.
I would like to concentrate my comments on the rapid deterioration of the economy, particularly as muni-spokesperson Lisa Landry stated that since November when the "blue ribbon committee" had made their recommendation the prospects for the economy had not changed, so to re-examine the wisdom of the tax increase was unnecessary.
Ovations were forthcoming for one audience member who eloquently stated that a lot had changed in recent months to Whistler's economic prospects, from the perspective of a business owner. I would add that the economic environment has also changed considerably both for Canada and the world in the last four months. For example, in November we did not know that eight of the largest banks in America, the U.K. and Ireland were essentially broke. That General Motors and Chrysler would require at least $70 billion from taxpayers to survive. That Japan's exports would suddenly fall 46 per cent in the first two months of this year. That the American Index of consumer confidence would drop to 25 in February from above 60 last September (100 is considered normal). That Canada's Gross Domestic Product on an income basis fell by 15.3 per cent in the fourth quarter of 2008, 10 times more rapid than that in the U.S. That the World Bank now sees the worst recession since the 1930s with world output falling 1 to 2 per cent - these are serious and dangerous times in their words. That the TD bank expects Canadian GNP to contract 2.4 per cent this year from a modest contraction forecast in November and 600,000 Canadians will be losing their jobs in 2009.
I think I rest my case "that the environment has worsened by a sufficient degree that forecasts of the ability of the community to absorb tax increases considered as bearable in November 2008 are unlikely to be bearable today." And this is especially so, if one's goal is to maintain a sustainable community.
On the other hand Mayor Ken correctly pointed out that council and the municipal employees will also be paying higher taxes. However, he neglected to add that government employees are likely the only group in our village who will enjoy higher incomes in 2009 and 2010. Many not employed by governments will see their incomes declining by 20 to 50 per cent over this period.
I think that might be my last attendance to a meeting on the justification of a tax increase - it was simply too discouraging.
Lennox McNeely
Whistler
Whistler Experience includes "off the books" accounting
From the RMOW Long-Term Financial Plan Draft of March 11th, 2009: "RMOW's total level of outstanding debt, and total debt servicing costs, increased significantly when the municipality borrowed $27.75 million for new infrastructure projects. This new debt included:
• $15 million for the community's new wastewater treatment facility
• $6 million for the new solid waste transfer station
• $3.5 million for the Whistler Public Library
• $3.25 million for Maurice Young Millennium Place.
In 2008, the municipality also borrowed an additional $100 million for the Cheakamus Crossing Athletes' Village. These funds are to be used, however, simply to provide bridge financing through the Whistler2020 Development Corporation (wholly owned by RMOW) during the construction of the units. Already, most of the units have been pre-sold as employee restricted housing. Through these sales, monies will be recovered by RMOW in full by 2011, and for that reason are not reflected in Figures 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3."
Hmm.... seems to me that a lot of the mess the global economy now finds itself in was related to incomplete or "off-the-books" accounting of various so-called assets and liabilities.
All in, the RMOW is on the hook for about $130 million. Anticipating that $100 million of this will be recovered by a certain date does not justify keeping it off the books. In an uncertain world, a lot can happen in between.
So rather than the RMOW debt-to-revenue ratio being 55.8 per cent as reported in the LTFP, the number is actually 163 per cent. These guys have a no-spending-limit credit card that we get the bill for.
In the current economic climate, rather than trying to justify the ongoing irresponsible profligate spending under the "Whistler Experience" rubric, they should be looking to cutback capital and operating expenses wherever possible.
Christopher R. Shackleton
Whistler
That's the ticket
I have been thinking about this for a while now and as I walk around town looking at all the "sale" signs it seems to me that everyone in town that is in business is doing everything they can to offer a great deal to all the consumers, be they tourist or local. Restaurants with two for one entrees, hotels with incredible room rates, clothing stores at 50 per cent-60 per cent off beginning in February this year, airlines with seat sales to Vancouver... it goes on and on.
There is, however, one glaring problem with all the deals being offered and that is without customers it really doesn't matter what the rest of us try to do to offer value, it all has to start with the Mountain. Do you think, for instance, skier visits would have been so bad in February and early March if lift ticket prices had been dropped to be on sale at say, $49? I know, that's crazy talk, or is it? Skiers would show up, take lessons, eat in restaurants and layoffs would have been minimized. At $89 for a day pass I think today's consumer is missing the "value" of coming up here. Forget the ski promo of having to ski many days in a row to save a couple of bucks, give people a real break!
The conditions right now are pretty good on the hill and the sun has been out more than any other year I can remember, yet still no skiers. The economy has had an effect on people absolutely, but people will spend their hard-earned cash if they see a great deal, just ask Peak Performance what 50 per cent off everything in the store did for their sales.
Today I received Intrawest Peak Deals by e-mail and the Fairmont is on sale, the Cascade lodge is on sale, the Westin is on sale, Westjet is on sale Longhorn is on sale, but lift tickets still $89 for one day. Hmmmm.
To the marketing department at Intrawest I say, the season is not a write off yet! Don't sit back and hope it all turns out OK because it could be a long haul until May 2010 for all of us.
Peter Elzinga
Beach or Bust
The Beach
Whistler
AWARE on IPPs
To the community of Whistler:
Independent Power Projects (IPPs) have increasingly been an issue of concern in our corridor and in British Columbia, and AWARE has been involved in these discussions. AWARE first became interested in how IPPs might impact the corridor during the SLRD hearings about the proposed (and now under construction) Ashlu Project back in 2006. Private companies have applied for IPP licenses on several local waterways, so it has been important for AWARE to take a close look at the IPPs in the corridor.
The B.C. government currently makes decisions about IPP applications in a vacuum. Each IPP application is considered as if there is no other. There is no consideration of the cumulative effects of 700 IPPs and their associated transmission wires on fish, fisheries, animal migration routes, tourism, or recreational use.
In light of this unscientific and undemocratic approach AWARE's current position on IPPs can be summarized as follows:
• AWARE believes that run of river energy can be one of many ways to provide green energy. However, we are calling for a moratorium on all Independent Power Projects on rivers until a comprehensive study of all existing and proposed projects can be done to determine which rivers are best suited environmentally to these projects.
• AWARE also believes that all such projects should remain in public hands. A completed study would also require an independent and transparent oversight so the public still has the ability to monitor its assets.
We hope that the citizens of the Sea to Sky corridor will continue to take an interest in this important issue. Energy, how we get it, and how it impacts our environment are important issues, and we must ensure we are making the best decisions possible.
For more information about AWARE please go to our website at awarewhistler.org, or email us at aware@direct.ca .
Sara Jennings,
AWARE President
IPP policy a breach of trust
Thanks for publishing Nigel Protter's resume last week (everything about him except his price to facilitate IPPs as a BC Liberal insider). He's clearly a Renaissance man, and his mother should be proud, but it doesn't alter the fundamental problems with private power.
The ultimate proof of the corrupt nature of the B.C. Energy Plan - "No New Public Power," originally copied from Alcan's wish list after the 2001 election wherein unregistered lobbyist Patrick Kinsella was Gordon Campbell's bagman, while also working for Alcan to promote the sale of their electricity at windfall prices - is that billions of dollars of public property powersites are being given away to friends of government for essentially nothing, without any semblance of a proper bidding process, for less than a penny on the dollar.
Electing the Campbell Liberals to handle our energy future has been like hiring someone to manage your house, and then discovering that he has chosen to give it away to his friends, forcing you to rent your own house back as a place to live.
Privatization of our public electricity-producing assets would be questionable at best with a proper open bidding process, because our future obligations to buy back private power far exceed the financing charges if we simply had private companies build the facilities while retaining public ownership, as we did half a century ago with B.C. Hydro's heritage electricity, the "powerhouse of the B.C. economy," and the envy of North America.
However, simply giving assets away, without any proper bidding process, so companies can take a contract to the bank to self-finance the projects, is an unforgivable breach of public trust.
As has been made clear in SFU economics professor Dr. John Calvert's Liquid Gold - Energy Privatization in British Columbia, we are paying too much now for private power which we could easily obtain elsewhere, while we actually have lots of time to organize a proper plan for future power.
Let's also remember, despite government spin, private power provides absolutely no "energy security" for B.C., because when the contracts run out, we'll be paying California prices for "our own" power. Government and lobbyists are already speaking of a vast "green" private export plan. Of course, unlike exports through our publicly owned Powerex, which has made billions for British Columbians over the decades, there will be no public benefit with private export.
Doug Morrison
Garibaldi Highlands
