Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

TW responds, University of Whistler?, schools closed for Olympics, back off Michel, one last word on London Drugs

TW welcomes interest, participation In a recent letter to the editor, Jay Wahono made reference to Tourism Whistler’s upcoming annual general meeting on May 17, 2007 and highlighted the value of continuing a focused approach to growing tourism for Wh

TW welcomes interest, participation

In a recent letter to the editor, Jay Wahono made reference to Tourism Whistler’s upcoming annual general meeting on May 17, 2007 and highlighted the value of continuing a focused approach to growing tourism for Whistler.

We would like to thank Mr. Wahono for contributing to the dialogue regarding the importance of an engaged membership at Tourism Whistler and the significance of a committed and effective board of directors.

The leadership of Tourism Whistler’s board of directors has been critical to providing a framework for success. By focusing on key strategic priorities approved by the board, Tourism Whistler has positively moved the dial on diversifying our target markets, shifting distribution channels, driving room nights, and increasing revenues for the resort. Some highlights include:

• Growing group business (which represents approximately 25% of all room nights booked annually in the resort) particularly during non-peak periods of the spring, summer and fall; sales for the TELUS Whistler Conference Centre increased by more than 140% in 2006 compared to 2005;

• Purchasing 49% of Whistler.com, with transition of call-to-action occurring in the summer of 2006; bookings and revenues have almost doubled since securing Whistler.com as a community asset;

• Diversifying our target markets by increasing marketing investment into golf, mountain biking and health and wellness;

• Developing new plans to leverage opportunities associated with the 2010 Winter Games; including communications, marketing and visitor services;

• Securing more than $1 million of incremental funding in 2006 from tourism industry and government partners for further investment in marketing and sales initiatives;

• Leading a resort-wide value strategy aimed at improving the visitor experience in all three areas of the value equation: price, product and service.

Contrary to Mr. Wahono’s suggestion that the announcement regarding the 2007 AGM was low-key, Tourism Whistler annually provides two separate packages of information regarding the meeting and election of directors to all of its members (i.e. more than 7,000 members who own, manage and operate properties or businesses on Resort lands including hotels, restaurants, activity operators, retail shops and residential homes). It is important to point out that only members are eligible to vote for representatives on the board of directors, and this is why detailed information regarding this process is distributed to our members and not to the general public.

The first AGM package was distributed to members two weeks ago. A second package of information, with details regarding candidates for the board of directors, will be distributed to members in early April along with voting instructions. Members are reminded that information regarding the 2007 AGM and election of directors is also posted at www.tourismwhistler.com/members.

In an effort to grow interest in the election process among members and to encourage diversity at the board table, the nominating committee of the board of directors has been actively soliciting potential candidates in all categories available for election in 2007. Mr. Wahono’s letter incorrectly suggested that the deadline for submitting nominations for the election of directors is March 7, 2007. In fact, the deadline for nominations by members is 5 p.m. on March 8, 2007. As in previous years, public announcements will also be made in the weeks leading up to the AGM regarding the date, time and location of the meeting which is open to all those interested in attending.

As a final point of clarification, Mr. Wahono’s letter stated incorrectly that Tourism Whistler exists to promote its members’ businesses and to diversify the resort’s product offerings. Tourism Whistler’s purpose is to market and sell Whistler (as a whole) to the world as the year-round mountain resort of choice.

On behalf of its board of directors, Tourism Whistler encourages and welcomes an increased interest and greater participation in the board of directors and the election of directors process. Such an enhancement in awareness and engagement only strengthens the organization’s effectiveness in marketing and selling Whistler to the world.

Barrett Fisher

President, Tourism Whistler

On behalf of the Tourism Whistler Board of Directors 2006/2007

 

No little swamp

RE: Tom Demarco’s letter “University proposal a great opportunity” (Pique Feb. 22)

I would like to respond to Tom Demarco’s letter of last week, regarding the construction of a university on the Alpha Lands between Function Junction and West Side Road. First, I take issue with Tom’s reference to this property as “one little swamp”. This property is a large wetland complex of 80 acres full of old growth, bear dens, ponds, streams, and wildlife. The developer plans to build on 30 of the 80 acres just above the wetlands. This is one of the very last valley-bottom refuges in the Whistler Valley for wildlife.

Based on the developer’s plans to house all students and faculty on site, there could be 1,000 people living on the very edge of and into this wetland complex. The uplands area of any wetland greatly influences its health, and plants and animals that live in the Alpha Creek area rely on both uplands and wetlands and the symbiosis between the two to survive. Paving and building on the upland area within this complex will disrupt this symbiosis. Further, the trash, wandering students, new trails, runoff from pavement, erosion, and siltation from construction will be the final nail in the coffin of this complex and beautiful natural area.

Muni staff in the past have rated almost all of these lands as having the highest ecological values in the area. So, the question is: are we prepared to see the compromise of these natural areas for the sake of another development? To “upzone” this area that currently allows construction of only four homes to a university with extensive infrastructure, housing, recreational facilities, food outlets, services, meeting space, and outdoor gathering areas is a major revision of the area’s intended use.

As I stated in Alison Taylor’s story, a university would be of great benefit to Whistler and the region. However, if a university is so compelling, is there only one place it can be built? Where is the creative thinking here? Could there be a land swap? I don't know, but it is not in AWARE’s mandate to find solutions for developers.

What kind of response would our membership and the community have if AWARE were to support development on the valley’s last remaining wetlands? That would be totally inconsistent with the past, and our mandate. We’ve been asked to comment on development on this land before for different projects from the same developer, and the answer has always been the same — leave it alone, in its natural state.

With construction going on just about everywhere else around it, AWARE believes the Alpha Creek wetlands serve a very useful purpose right now. The wetlands have already been damaged by the development of Spring Creek, and further construction followed by habitation en masse will deepen the impact. This is no little swamp as anyone who has walked it knows. We have come too far and know too much about our ecological footprint to continue with status quo development in sensitive areas, regardless of the final product.

Brad Kasselman

President, AWARE

 

The people we should pursue

I recently read somewhere with dismay a group promoting establishing a university in Whistler. This would further unbalance the Whistler demographics spectrum and contribute to the low cost accommodation crisis already at hand. What we are socially in need of is the 30 to 50 demographic with equity and disposable income.

What about proposing a couple of 99-year leases on large buildable plots of Olympic legacy land to some large corporations whom intellectual property is their product. For example Electronic Arts, Microsoft or Research in Motion.

In exchange for 1 dollar per year leases on valuable land these companies agree to employee home ownership assistance packages, which enable their staff to acquire market housing already built.

This also gives us a larger local population able to support the local businesses on a year round basis. Not just weekends and wintertime.

Bruce MacDonald

Whistler

 

Terms for Games in schools

This letter was addressed to School District 48 trustees. A copy was forwarded to Pique.

The idea to use the four high schools for various Olympic purposes is indeed a valid one providing, however, the following issues are thoroughly discussed and implemented:

It is the students, teachers and staff who are the only ones that are inconvenienced and therefore by vote (each school separately) should have the only say whether it is on or off.

The school board’s only function should be to negotiate (with professional input) and execute four individual commercial leases with the parties that wish to occupy the premises, or directly with VANOC itself.

The leases should typically be triple net, prepaid and with a substantial damage deposit up front payable directly to each individual school, to be used at their sole discretion.

The students, families and faculty should decide when to make up the time lost for this venture, again incorporated in the suggested vote mentioned earlier.

Students and faculty should be offered the opportunity to volunteer during the Games, in addition to having passes to all events and the mountains at zero cost.

Finally, the minister of education should be involved to accommodate students with the provincial exams usually scheduled during these dates.

This can be a very win-win situation for all the high school students in the corridor, and accommodate the needing parties with space during these once in a lifetime events.

Casey Niewerth (father of two high school children)

Whistler

 

Smarter than the average millionaires?

Michel Beaudry’s column of Feb. 22nd states Intrawest was able "to pull the wool over American investors' eyes" to inflate the price they got for the company. I can assure you that Fortress is about the least likely group to get taken for a ride. This month Fortress went public revealing just how smart they are — if a measure of smarts is by wealth. The five partners had a combined income of $446.9 million in 2006, additionally they recently sold stock worth $1.4 billion to Nomura Securities and the public and paid themselves a dividend of $409.2 million before the public issue. After the sales they were left with 77.7 per cent of the company worth $9.6 billion. Adding this all up the average partner has made a score of $2.3 billion in the last 14 months. Not too shabby for a company established in 1999.

Michel also had problems, in an earlier article, with Joe Hussein pocketing US$120 million for his 20 years leading Intrawest. This figure looks like chump change to a Fortress principal — hardly enough to buy a decent Picasso these days, the badge of having class as well as money amongst hedge managers.

How do they make so much? One means is by buying a company and thinning the staff, cutting back on every cost and long term capital expenditures (the China project), selling off marginal units (Panorama) and refinancing with debt or other means to increase the return on equity. Hedge funds are known most for the largesse of their profits — not for innovation, invention or discovery.

Gone are the days when you find the chap next to you on the lift owns the mountain. However, moving from a proud Canadian, somewhat innovative, corporate owner headquartered in our province which had built up a world class leisure company to a hedge operator is most unfortunate in my opinion.

Rest assured these investors have a Plan B in place to further line their pockets and likely dispose of Intrawest in the not too distant future. Could it be Nike-Whistler by 2010?

In closing I wish to disclose that I have never been an employee of Intrawest or a shareholder but have been an investor in hedge funds for over 15 years, a skier on Whistler for 39 years, many times pissed off with Intrawest and I coincidentally skied with a senior member of management of Fortress last year for five days.

Lennox McNeely

Whistler

 

For the locals?

Is it over or not? Host 2010 and they will come. Is London Drugs really trying to open a store in Whistler to help the locals or secure a place for the Olympics? Who’s next?

My thought, if they were here to help the locals, why would they sacrifice department sizes and square footage to set up in the village, when there are other locations that would allow them to maximize space?

Coming from the city, you have lots of choices for one-stop shopping. I watched prices, got to know were the deals were, when things were on sale and when they weren’t. London Drugs was not always the best price.

Yes, having another place to shop in Whistler would give locals a better chance to save a penny, depending on what they are buying. But council needs to figure out a better way to help the locals. Rent in this town is way too high. People come here to enjoy life, to find a balance between life and work, but having to work two or more jobs, living with roommates just to pay the bills is not a balanced life, that is just working to survive.

So, if London Drugs is coming to Whistler to give the locals another place to shop, then find a location that allows them to maximize the departments that would give locals more choices. The tourists are not here year round, the locals are. We need to use that space for what it is zoned for, recreation.

Paula Palmer

Whistler

 

Statements raise concerns

While I was disappointed by the RMOW rejection of London Drugs locating in Whistler, I was concerned by the statements by Mayor Ken Melamed as reported in Pique Newsmagazine.

"We don't relish having to disagree with the community."

"I feel a certain amount of anguish because I know that there are people who are going to be dissatisfied with the decision and feel like I've betrayed them."

These two statements seem to show that the RMOW is knowingly not representing the community. If so then who are they representing? The resort seems to be the answer, not the people. Is that what democracy is all about?

Even more troubling was the statement: "There are choices that local residents have to make to live here and we cannot be all things to all people."

What is this statement saying? If you don't like it leave? You are only here as servants to the resort?

I also found the statement: "We don't exist without those visitors, and we know they're not going to travel here for London Drugs."

Do people come to Whistler to buy groceries? Do people come to Whistler to go to movies? Do people come to Whistler to buy clothes?

People come to Whistler for what the mountains have to offer. Goods sold here make our stay in Whistler more enjoyable. Being a frequent visitor to Whistler I would find the goods a London Drugs offers would make my stay here more enjoyable.

Bill Langlais

Whistler

 

Whistler’s soul on film

On February 22 nd , 2007 the Whistler Museum premiered its third instalment of its community now film project. This film project, sponsored by Bell, CELEBRATION 2010™, the Government of B.C., the Resort Municipality of Whistler, and the Whistler Arts Council, strives to foster community pride in Whistler’s history, heritage and culture.

Thank-you to the participants: Ace Mackay-Smith, Alexandra Rebagliati, Bob Barnett, Chelsey Walker, Cheryl Massey, Chris Winter, Colin Pitt-Taylor, Doug Craig, Greg Reamsbottom, Jordan Williams, Ken Melamed, Leslie Anthony, Michele Bush, Ross Rebagliati, Uschi Scherer, and Vincent Massey, who are shining examples of what makes Whistler such a special place!

And a huge thank you and congratulations to Nicole Fitzgerald who produced, directed and wrote this year’s film, and to Brian Hockenstein who did all the camera work, editing, and motion graphics. This year’s film was outstanding and really captured Whistler’s soul. All the long hours and hard work definitely paid off — the film was fantastic!

Jehanne Burns, Karen Overgaard

The Whistler Museum