NEW SPECIAL TAXES TO PAY FOR ROAD MANTENANCE

It Appears Lac Ste. County is broke and needs new special taxes to pay for Infrastructure Maintenance. 

Read More

Mayerthorpe Freelancer July 24 2023

 Mayerthorpe Freelancer 

July 24 2023

CLICK HERE TO READ THE ARTICLE

BE SURE TO CAST YOUR VOTE FOR

 "SEEK PROVINCIAL REVIEW"

Are you ready? WE ARE! LSARA would appreciate if you would come and join us tonight at Darwell Hall July 24th at 7pm. For those who have contacted us looking to volunteer, thank you . We need some folks in each Division to make this happen. We will be looking to sign you up! Memberships available on our Facebook page or at the meetings. See you soon!

Read More

Mayerthorpe July 20 2023

Thank you Mayerthorpe and Area

for showing up in record numbers to the July 20 2023 LSARA Meeting

It is very evident to us that by the numbers that appeared last night that you hear us! The time for Citizen Action as a group is now. Your membership and participation in LSARA is more critical than ever. Your voice is important.

Please join us at Gunn Hall this evening at 7 pm or Darwell Hall on Monday at 7 PM. Memberships will be available at both meetings or alternately you can visit our blog at lsaracares.blogspot.com

Read More

2021 LSAC Municipal Election

The 2021 Election of our Municipality is Fast Approaching. 

 Here are some things to Ponder!

When LSARA was formed, we had, (and still do) had a mandate. One of the biggest reasons we were formed was that we did not have any trust with the Council and Administration that was in place. With the Council that was elected in 2017, we made a promise to one another that we would give the “NEW COUNCIL” which was some old and some new, a chance to make the changes. This was a platform that they all campaigned on. They promised you and I, the Ratepayers of Lac Ste Anne County that they would have open lines of communication and they would ensure that there was transparency. The Ratepayers would never be the last ones to know where our hard earned tax dollars were being spent.

Although it may seem to you that we were no longer in existence, we continued behind the scenes and observed to see whether or not this change that they all promised us was occurring. At first, the minutes did become more informative, and administration was timely in responses to our questions. Then came the ORMC - Onoway Regional Medical Clinic. This was the first big test for the new council.

When we spoke to Ratepayers in the County, they felt that this was not a county issue but rather an Alberta Health Services burden. It became evident very quickly that current council and administration was not going to listen, so we got to work once again and on behalf of the ratepayers, LSARA petitioned and presented arguments at a council open house. There were folks that were directly involved in the medical care facilities with Aspen Heath Services that also presented in objection to the direction Council and Administration was taking on the ORMC. After the presentations, the purchase of the building and the renovations, creation of the Association being formed to administer the Medical clinic was TABLED indefinitely by council at that time. We were very happy that Council took credence in the wishes of the Ratepayers. More investigation and information were certainly required to move forward. Fast forward a very short time and we find they QUIETLY went forward. They began by first leasing and improving the medical facility borrowing over $2000,000 to do so. Then actually forming a board and running/owning the medical building as stated with the Council and Administration as Directors. There is much to be said regarding making leasehold improvements then paying “fair market value” for the same building you paid to improve? There are some Regional Summer Villages and towns that are also involved but none with a larger stake than the Ratepayers of LSAC.

An additional concern that LSARA has is that we asked for a list of the Short Term and Long-Term borrowing past, present and future (already approved but not yet released). 

Below was the response LSARA received. Borys Knysh is spotlighted in the email but was NEVER in the thread of emails. Borys was not and never is, the author of any of the request for information forms (RFI)sent to the county. 

This process was actually put in place as a result of requests by LSARA hoping we believe to prevent us from requesting information. In fact what it has done is allowed us to keep better track of what we have requested and what we have received a response to.

To date, it is very important to note that we have never been provided nor have we seen a list published to the entire ratepayers since we submitted a Request For Information as promissed in the Email. 

In addition, we still do not have the total information of how the funding came about for this new venture be it Short Term or Long-Term borrowing. In a type of partnership with a handful of the surrounding communities with the ratepayers of LSAC being the main shareholder, can they opt out? Leave the County Ratepayers holding the bag for all of the costs? Being the main shareholder certainly means we bare the brunt of the losses that may be incurred. Have you see a recent calculation of the losses already realized in the minutes of LSAC Council Meetings? Neither have we however, it has been published in the Onoway Town Council Meeting. Review of this publication shows in excess of $87,000 with the full loss to be realized after year one. The actual losses will not be known until sometime in February or March 2022. That means this loss can be well in excess of $120,000 and the questions should be: Where in the budget does this come from? Where in the budget is the corporation budget overall? Why did they not hold another public forum before going forward with this endeavor? Did you, as a County Ratepayer, wish to be an owner of a medical clinic? Were there other options available or investigated? 

When current council was queried on some of the concerns one being why was it our responsibility as Ratepayers, it was stated that we have to have three doctors to service the area. Why three? We have to consider right up to the borders of our County in all directions. Does it make sense to you that an individual would drive to Onoway from Mayerthorpe as an example that has a Hospital and doctors available to care for the region? Sure doesn't make sense to us. Does it make sense that we, as Ratepayers are taking on the financial burden that is already being paid through our Provincial and Federal taxes we pay to provide Health Care to Albertans?

Just some questions to ponder when you consider if past their promises to be open and transparent have been honored by those (past council) who campaigned on that very premise. Much like the “white elephant” (also costing thousands in repairs and no word where in the budget that comes from), the will of the people was ignored but current and past council leaving us vulnerable to tax increases to cover losses. Not to mention the law suit that is also underway for deficiencies on the County Building. How much has this already cost us and how much more will it cost us? These are ONLY 2 AREAS that we highlight that are of great financial concern. We have not even touched on utilities of solid waste and lagoons, bridges, fire departments, public works, roads to name a few.

Election is a short time away. VOTE October 18, 2021


Email from Council regarding request for Borrowing Bylaws:


Nicholas Gelych <NGelych@lsac.ca>
Wed, May 8, 2019, 12:47 AM

to George, Joe, Lloyd, Lorne, Nicholas, Ross, Steve, LSARA, Chris, me, Brad, Lucille, Mike, Robert

Good Afternoon All;

As there is no indication as to who sent this email, I am going to assume that addressing this to you, Mr. Boris Knysh, will be sufficient. As a note, most organizations when communicating, do actually sign the document, thus creating accountability and transparency. Also, it would be nice to see who is the writer of the document so that your image is protected from just anyone being able to send out requests, etc. on your behalf and without your approval.

As far as to the request of the borrowing bylaws, it was requested that the last five years of our short-term borrowing bylaws be sent to Mrs. Leann Knysh, and now it seems that all borrowing is being asked for, which is fine; however, due to operational priorities of the County and the preparation of the 2019 Tax Notices , we are committed to providing all borrowing information requested and will make it public to all residents as time permits.

As mentioned to you previously, the audit captures all County financials, regardless of you believing that the auditor isn’t being truthful. In fact, for you to mention it, is cause for concern. The independent audit is preformed to ensure ratepayers have a clear window into the audited financial statements for the County.

All borrowing by Lac Ste. Anne County will be made available to the public through local papers and posted to the LSAC website, and you will be able to view when all our residents can. LSARA are not considered special, no more so than any individual resident residing within the county and do not speak for the 10,849 other ratepayers; we represent them as elected representatives. Look forward to seeing your name on a ballot in October 2021.

Please feel free to post this on your LSARA Facebook blog.

Nick Gelych

Nick Gelych
Division 2 Councillor

Cell: 780-903-9393

56521 RGE RD 65 (1 mile east of Sangudo on Hwy 43) l BOX 219 l SANGUDO AB T0E 2A0
Phone: (780)785-3411 l 1-866-880-5722 l Fax: (780)785-2985


Partial Lagoon Costs reported on Country Council Minutes

Title: 2021 Lagoon Sludge Removal Tender Approval

PREPARATION DETAILS
Department Of:
Proposed Actions:

Utilities & Special Projects
Direct Administration



RECOMMENDATION:

That County Council direct Administration to accept the proposal from Kayden
Industries to perform the 2021 Lagoon sludge removal and disposal for a total lump
sump fee of $ 597,581.42.

ORMC BUDGET (LOSSES) from the Agenda of the Onoway Council Meeting from June 3, 2021

Read More

2021 Membership

Lac Ste. Anne and Communities Ratepayers Association Continues to Support the Residents of LSAC

LSARA continues to be actively interacting with Council and Administration regarding items we feel have the ability to impact us all.  We go well beyond what you SEE in our posts on Facebook and on our Blog.  

The posts we publish are also only one component of what we do.  We hold public meetings, executive meetings. Meetings with other organizations such as Municipal Government. Communicate with other Ratepayers associations to ensure we are all on the same page.

Even though other counties may have different issues, many of them arise for the same reasons. No one is listening or items that should trigger debate and a vote are decided before we know about them or the process is circumvented to prevent us from having our say. It takes time to obtain information by way of FOIP access.

Accountability remains the number #1 item on our agenda.  We intend to continue to move forward with the newly elected council and hold them to a higher standard than we held the last one.  We remember their campaign promises wherein they told us they would be "transparent, fiscally responsible, openly communicative".  Those promises were never fulfilled!

LSARA has continued to act in the best interest of all the Ratepayers of Lac Ste Anne County. We have told you that we will hold them to their campaign promises.  There may be a day where we have to make the “call to action” in order to do that.

That will be where we need all of our members to come to a meeting to discuss a serious issue we see looming or before us.  This will be one of the times where how many members we have will be critical. We need your membership.

Remember that LSARA is non-profit Ratepayers Association formed by and run by Ratepayers just like you.  We can only remain viable with your support.

We determined that we will not charge a membership fee for 2021.  We do have a Goal to Increase our Membership to 2600 LSAC Ratepayers before the 2021 Election.  We Need Your Support To Do This! Please Register and Share with your Friends!  WE NEED YOUR HELP!

Of course Taxable Donations are Always Welcome!

Additionally, LSARA is prepared to make application for funding grants to support our organization. We will never share our membership list without permission of the membership. Rest assured there can be no repercussions from anywhere because you choose to support your own Ratepayers Association.

LSARA is currently seeking Directors and members at large that would be willing to actively contribute with research, membership, create articles for the blog and newspapers, review minutes, attend council meetings to name a few.

Follow us on Facebook Lac Ste Anne Ratepayers Association Follow our blog http://lsaracares.blogspot.ca . Send us an email at lsaracares@gmail.com Communicate with us and your fellow Ratepayers.

Join us and Register Now to make our County Accountable to our Ratepayers. We would be happy to share with you current issues that affect our County.

Read More

IS LSAC BEING TRANSPARENT

IS LSAC BEING TRANSPARENT

On May 13, 2019 Lac Ste. Anne County published in the Lac Ste. Anne Bulletin yet another full page article entitled  "COUNTY PROVIDES FURTHER POINTS OF CLARIFICATION FOLLOWING MAY 1 PUBLIC HEARINGS".

One must ask the question 

“Is Lac Ste. Anne County being transparent” 

CLICK PICTURE TO ENLARGE

What is our county trying to accomplish with the jargon in this article? Who are they trying to convince that there is some sort of conspiracy to spread “rumors, conjecture and mistrust” as stated in the last paragraph of this article. What are they so afraid of when the Ratepayers challenge or question their own policies, procedures and new found ventures?

This is not the first time we have such a feeble attempt to stifle the ratepayers concerns. It's time that they stop the nonsense and start providing some answers.

The last paragraph in their article also seems to sum up what we as ratepayers would like to see our County Council and Administration do, give us the "FACTS".

It is a shame that with all the Election Promises to end such nonsense that we are still facing the task of fighting for Transparency. What happened to the LSAC Values as stated on their website:

www.lsac.ca   Our Values: Our decisions are guided by:

Accountability 

Transparency 

Collaboration 

Trust 

Respect 

Integrity 

Diversity 

Sustainability            

The following letter sent to LSAC was written by Clifford Cottingham.  The last point in the letter pretty much sums up what we have been up against with our past council and unfortunately, our new council.  

There is only one thing in common in both the councils and that is the "Administration" that is providing them 'Guidance"!

15 May 2019
County of Lac Ste Anne
Box 219
Sangudo AB T0E 2A0

RE: MCC ONOWAY REGIONAL MEDICAL CLINIC

After attendance at the 9 May 2019 council meeting, and reading the information in response to recent questions and concerns related to the establishment of a MCC for Onoway Medical Clinic, a few questions remain unanswered that I had previously asked, and a question arises from decisions made by council at the referenced meeting.

• The response notes that AHS have been consulted and that they support the initiative to recruit a physician for the Onoway Clinic. Please advise who that AHS individual is that the county has had continuing discussion with about the plan for the Onoway Clinic.
• It has been clarified that the target for physicians is 2.5. Taking information from county documents, it is noted that in 2018 there were 1.8 physicians in practise accounting for a total of $194,200 in physician overhead or $107,888 per physician, with a slight increase in the physician overhead for 2019. It notes as well that there were 1.8 physicians in 2019 and the budget notes 2.5 in 2020. In year 2020 it projects $318,700 in overhead or $127,480 per physician, which is a 18.5% increase for each physician. Have the current physicians been made aware of this increase, and what is the rationale for the increase, presumably increase in patient activity and/or an increase in the base fee calculation per physician? What market analysis supports this increase in activity? One of the major concerns is that this increase will not be attained in 2020 or any subsequent year, thus putting the entire project’s financial viability in question, and thus become a burden on the taxpayers even though the County states there is virtually none. 
• No answer has been provided regarding the question of the budget noting a line of equipment loan repayment. What are the anticipated equipment items that will need to be funded in this manner?
• At the council meeting noted above, the Bylaw 11 for the Medical Clinic Facility was deferred by unanimous vote. What are the terms of such deferment? When will it be brought back to council and in what form, a new bylaw, or same bylaw?
• In the Lac Ste Anne Bulletin dated May 13, 2019, the county provides further points of clarification following May 1 public hearings. The last statement in the information is very interesting. Provision of accurate information is vitally important for all parties to understand what is planned and going forward. The county appears to have been less than forthcoming with detailed, well thought out and researched information. Dialogue about these initiatives before council is certainly encouraged. Dialogue is defined (Random House Dictionary) as a conversation between two or more persons, an exchange of ideas or opinions on a particular issue. To that end, why doesn’t council have a two way dialogue with rate payers instead of the one way communication that happens now? Making presentations to council with no response by council members at the time, not allowing any questions of clarification at council meetings, is not a dialogue, but a method to control and shut out meaningful exchange. Perhaps an open meeting with council to hear concerns and other opinions may be helpful. Without this two way open communication, a vacuum occurs and rumour, conjecture and mistrust happens. 

It is encouraging that council might be listening to some of the concerns and issues raised and are maybe taking a second serious look at this and other proposals. Only by providing easily understandable information and responding to concerns will the best decisions be made by council on behalf of all the residents in the county.

Thank you.

Clifford B Cottingham

STAY TUNED 

LSARA will be reviewing this topic in the very near future 
and updates will be published.

PLEASE JOIN US WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT

2019 LSARA Membership is only $10.00 Single / $20.00 Family
CLICK ON THE FORM AND IT WILL OPEN 

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT

LSARA CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT YOU

PLEASE FORWARD THIS POST TO YOUR 
FAMILY AND FRIENDS

Read More

SAY NO TO LSAC FOR PROFIT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

SAY NO TO LSAC FOR PROFIT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

Lac Ste. Anne County administration hired a marketing consultant to create, promote and sell to you a "FOR PROFIT" at Arm's Length Corporation with our County's Tax Dollars and our County's Credit!

Why and for what reasons you might ask. Here are some of the reasons that you may have not fully understood and the repercussions of this new venture that you will pay for!

From the "NEW LSAC LEGACY MUNICIPAL LAND CORPORATION WEBSITE" created by the "Marketing Consultants" FOR LSAC ADMINISTRATION AND PAID FOR BY YOUR TAX DOLLARS!

How much will the Board Members and the Executive Director be paid?       
The Lac Ste. Anne County Councillors that sit on the Legacy MLC Board will not collect any additional compensation for fulfilling this role. Councillors receive compensation for the many commitments they attend as a Councillor. The Executive Director, who will coordinate meetings and advise the Board, will receive no additional compensation and will complete these minimal tasks within their current role and compensation. Any additional administrative services, financial management, banking, et cetera, are the responsibility of Legacy MLC, and the cost of these services is budgeted. Currently, these services are planned to be contracted from the County, and Legacy MLC will pay for those services. In the event that the County is unable to provide these additional administrative services due to staff availability, Legacy MLC could, once incorporated, purchase these services from a third party.

• YES THAT MEANS "YOU" THE RATEPAYERS ARE RESPONSIBLE TO COVER THE COSTS AND LOSSES.

Why is the County looking to incorporate Legacy MLC?

Following in the footsteps of other municipalities such as the City of Edmonton, City of Calgary, the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo, the Town of Drumheller and the City of Airdrie, Lac Ste. Anne County is seeking to establish a land development and property management municipally controlled corporation. The corporation will provide Council with a tool to address development priorities that are otherwise ignored by private development companies. The incorporated status ensures that the development activities are performed by a legally separate entity, in a financially independent environment from the County and its municipal activities.

• SINCE WHEN SHOULD OUR COUNTY FOLLOW THE FOOTSTEPS OF THE CITY'S OF EDMONTON AND CALGARY.
• LSAC WILL BE %100 SHAREHOLDER OF THIS CORPORATION YOU THE RATEPAYERS WILL BE ON THE HOOK FOR THIS SCHEME FOR ANY LOSSES.

What are the future projects being considered for Legacy MLC?

Beyond the initial project to build a medical office facility for the Onoway Regional Medical Clinic Corporation, no other projects have been specifically identified. The Legacy MLC Corporation will provide Council will a tool to address development priorities that are otherwise ignored by private development companies. As these priorities are identified, additional projects will then be investigated. Ultimately, projects may be identified as financially practical that include daycare facilities; seniors and low-income housing; commercial/industrial land development; recreation or community facilities; and/or internet and telecommunications projects. The possibilities for advancement within our communities will only be limited by the limits of entrepreneurial innovation.

• YES THEY CAN AND WILL DO AS THEY DEEM FIT ON YOUR TAX DOLLARS AND LSAC CREDIT
• THE LEGACY LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ORMC AND THE "ADDITIONAL PROJECTS" DIRECTLY COMPETE WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND THE RATEPAYERS.
• THE RIGHTS OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND THE RATEPAYERS WERE VIOLATED AS THEY CHOSE NOT TO HAVE A "MARKET IMPACT ANALYSIS" DONE AS REQUIRED BY THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT IN THE "BUSINESS PLAN" FOR THIS SCHEME.

Why wasn’t a market impact analysis completed for Legacy MLC?

The purpose of a market impact analysis is to review the impact of adding an additional competitor or additional services into a competitive market. In the case of the Legacy MLC, the planned corporation is not competing with existing property developers on projects that provide opportunities to maximize investment. The municipally controlled corporation will be participating in projects with minimal financial returns (too low to attract private participation) and significant social benefits for the community.

• WRONG!!!  WHY TRY TO LIE TO THE RATEPAYERS AND PRIVATE SECTOR?
• IT IS NOT UP TO THE MARKETING CONSULTANTS AND LSAC ADMINISTRATION TO IGNORE THE "MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT" AS THEY SEE FIT!


• AS THEY STATED ABOVE : "As these priorities are identified, additional projects will then be investigated. Ultimately, projects may be identified as financially practical that include daycare facilities; seniors and low-income housing; commercial/industrial land development; recreation or community facilities; and/or internet and telecommunications projects. The possibilities for advancement within our communities will only be limited by the limits of entrepreneurial innovation."            Section 4 of the Municipally Controlled Corporations Regulation states: a business plan must include the following information: (h) a market impact analysis if municipal control of the corporation would result in competition with similar services provided by the private sector.  Projects such as daycare facilities, commercial/industrial land development, etc. are a direct competition to services provided by the private sector.
• BRAD JAVORSKY INFORMED COUNCIL OF THE REQUIREMENT IN THE PUBLIC HEARING OF MAY 1, 2019 AS PER THE MGA AND THE MCC REGULATION. MGA s.75.1(4) MCCR s.4 (h)   
• HE ALSO SUBMITTED A WRITTEN OBJECTION TO THE LEGACY MLC "BUSINESS PLAN" TO THE RECORDING SECRETARY ALONG WITH HIS VERBAL PRESENTATION.         (click here to read the full written objection)

What obligations would the Legacy MLC MCC place on taxpayers?

Legacy Municipal Land Corporation (Legacy MLC) is borrowing money from the County with which it will build a valuable community resource and generate sufficient revenues via payments from ORMC to repay the loan and develop a reserve for future projects. The most significant risk that exists is in the event that the County (as the controlling partner in ORMC) decides to remove support from the Clinic and shut the facility down. Such a decision would be against the self-interests of the County and Council, given the County’s nearly ten years of supporting the Clinic with a subsidy, and the new facility investment.

• THE "MARKETING CONSULTANTS'" AND LSAC WOULD LIKE YOU TO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE ONOWAY MEDICAL CLINIC. DO NOT LET THEM FOOL YOU! IT IS "NOT JUST ABOUT OUR MEDICAL CLINIC"!!!
• THE OMC WAS OPERATING JUST FINE AS A JOINT COMMITTEE WITH 15 MUNICIPALITIES SUPPORTING THIS FINE VENTURE.
• IN 2016 WHEN LAC STE. ANNE COUNTY DECIDED TO MAKE THIS CLINIC INTO A "FOR PROFIT" VENTURE 9 OF THOSE MUNICIPALITIES DROPPED OUT OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE.
• ALBERTA BEACH STATED THEY COULD NOT SUPPORT THE NEW STRUCTURE DUE TO THE FLAWED "BUSINESS PLAN"!!!
• "County decides to remove support"...THE ONLY SUPPORT WE CAN THINK OF IS LSAC IS OFFERING ORMC FINANCIAL SUPPORT. ONCE AGAIN, THE RATEPAYERS ARE ON THE HOOK FOR ANY LOSSES!!!
• THE NEW LEGACY MLC MCC BUSINESS PLAN IS ALSO FLAWED AND THE CORPORATION IS NOT WANTED AS PROVED BY LSARA AND THE 1100 RATEPAYERS OF LSAC THAT SIGNED THE PETITION

PLEASE DON'T LET THIS "MARKETING CONSULTANTS PLAN" AND OUR LSAC ADMINISTRATION TELL US WHAT WE NEED IN THIS COUNTY!  LET'S FIX THE ROADS AND DO WHAT WE ALL KNOW NEEDS TO BE DONE!  

WE NEED A RESPONSIBLE COST EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION TO RUN OUR COUNTY!  THEY NEED TO STOP WASTING OUR TAX DOLLARS AND STOP EXPLODING OUR DEBT LOAD!

ONLY THE LSAC COUNCILLORS THAT YOU VOTED INTO LSAC COUNCIL CAN MAKE OUR ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE!

ONLY YOU THE RATEPAYERS CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN!

CALL OR WRITE TO YOUR COUNCILLORS AND MAKE THEM ACCOUNTABLE!

Joe Blakeman | Reeve, Councillor, Division 5

Email jblakeman@lsac.ca Ph. 780 918-1916

Lorne Olsvik | Councillor, Div. 1
Email lolsvik@lsac.ca Ph. 780 937-5360

Nick Gelych | Councillor, Div.2
Email ngelych@lsac.ca Ph. 780 903-9393

George Vaughan | Councillor, Div. 3
Email gvaughan@lsac.ca Ph. 780 967-3469

Steve Hoyda | Councillor, Div. 4
Email shoyda@lsac.ca Ph. 780 674-8080

Ross Bohnet | Councillor, Div. 6
Email rbohnet@lsac.ca Ph. 780 786-4290

Lloyd Giebelhaus | Councillor, Div. 7

Email lgiebelhaus@lsac.ca Ph. 780 785-2095

STAY TUNED 

LSARA will be reviewing this topic in the very near future 
and updates will be published.

PLEASE JOIN US WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT

2019 LSARA Membership is only $10.00 Single / $20.00 Family
CLICK ON THE FORM AND IT WILL OPEN 

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT

LSARA CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT YOU

PLEASE FORWARD THIS POST TO YOUR 
FAMILY AND FRIENDS

Read More

PETITION DENIED $1 MILLION BORROWING DEFERRED

PETITION DENIED   

$1 MILLION BORROWING DEFERRED

First and foremost thank you all who attended the past two council meetings and those who supported the Ratepayers with the recent petition in regards to two LSAC Borrowing Bylaws.  You all have shown that the LSAC Ratepayers care about what is going on in our county and neighbouring municipalities.

Over 1100 electors of LSAC signed our petitions to stop the borrowing of $1 million dollars to fund the Legacy Municipal Land Corporation, a proposed for profit Corporation.

1. The petition was deemed invalid for two reasons by the LSAC CAO Mike Primeau.  The reasons stated at the May 9, 2019 LSAC County Council Regular Meeting were; one petition was 50 signatures short and the other 44 signatures short of the required amount and deemed the petitions "Insufficient".
2. The required form was not attached for the contact person who submitted the petitions.

In addressing these two reasons LSARA has formally requested the "Red Line" copy of the petitions in order to review the signatures which were deleted from the total amount that we had submitted.
We look forward to confirming the findings of the CAO.

As for reason # 2  LSARA did submit two letters along with the petitions identifying ourselves as the Submitters of the Petitions along with the reasoning why these petitions were required. 

1. Letter to Mike Primeau CAO Lac Ste. Anne County  (click here to read)
2. Letter to each LSAC Councillors  (click here to read)

Confirmation of receipt of the Petition was addressed to LSARA in 3 communications from LSAC which would indicate the letters LSARA submitted did confirm who submitted the petition as required.

1. Email to LSARA From LSAC  (click here to read)
2. Letter Attached to Email From Mike Primeau CAO LSAC  (click here to read)
3. Letter sent to LSARA  from LSAC Acknowledgment Receipt of Petitions (click here to read)

Directly after deeming the petitions "Insufficient" Mike Primeau advised Council that now that the petitions were dealt with Council could continue with 2nd and 3rd Readings for Bylaw 11-2019 to Borrow $1 million dollars to fund Legacy MLC MCC. 

A motion was made by Lorne Olsvik to Defer the the 2nd and 3rd Readings!  The motion was unanimously carried! 

Council must of been listening to the pleas of the Ratepayers in opposition to this ill prepared process of creating a unnecessary Government Controlled and Funded Land Development Corporation. In thanking the council for making the right decision it was mentioned by a councillor 1100 signatures is a lot of signatures! Yes it is. In fact it represents a good number of the LSAC Electorate. Given that LSAC Administration did everything in there power to stop petitioners from signing petitions at the local landfills, LSARA feels that with proper notice the petition would have included a even greater percentage of the Electorate! 

Council does have the option to stand by the Ratepayers and do the right thing. Their vote on Lorne Olsvik Motion shows that they can.

On another note the "CAO REVIEW" which was on the Agenda was deferred also as it was not completed yet. We can only hope that this fiasco is included in the review.

STAY TUNED 

LSARA will be reviewing this topic in the very near future and updates will be published.

PLEASE JOIN US WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT

2019 LSARA Membership is only $10.00 Single / $20.00 Family
CLICK ON THE FORM AND IT WILL OPEN 

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT

LSARA CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT YOU

PLEASE FORWARD THIS POST TO YOUR 

FAMILY AND FRIENDS

Read More

LSARA CALL TO ACTION ONCE AGAIN

LSARA CALL TO ACTION ONCE AGAIN 

PLEASE ATTEND THE NEXT COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY MAY 9 AT 9:30 AM TO HEAR THEM READ THE DECLARATION OF THE PETITION.   IF YOU SIGNED, OR IF YOU DIDN’T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIGN BUT AGREE THAT MORE TIME NEEDS TO BE SPENT ON DETERMINING IF THE COUNTY SHOULD BE IN THE BUSINESS OF BEING IN BUSINESS, THEN PLEASE, WE IMPLORE YOU TO ATTEND THIS THURSDAY.

IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT CAO HAD 45 DAYS TO DETERMINE IF THE PETITION WAS VALID AND IT TOOK HIM LESS THAN A WEEK!  IF IT IS DETERMINED INVALID DIRECTLY DUE TO A TECHNICALITY THEN THEY, IN ESSENCE, ARE IGNORING THE 1100 + RATEPAYERS WISHES.   THEY SHOULD ALSO BE COGNIZANT OF THE FACT THAT THEIR ADVERTISEMENTS DID NOT HAVE THE MANDATED OR FULL INFORMATION AND FOR THAT REASON, IF SPEAKING ABOUT TECHNICALITIES, SHOULD BE RE ADVERTISED ALL OVER AGAIN.

ALSO, IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE LAST TIME COUNCIL SHOVED THROUGH A PROCESS AND SNUBBED THE RATEPAYERS, ONE COUNCILLOR RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 27 VOTES IN THE LAST ELECTION. THERE IS REMEDY BUT HOPEFULLY NOT BEFORE RUIN!

AGAIN, MAY 9TH ATTENDANCE AT COUNCIL MEETING IS HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. LET’S FILL THE HOUSE LIKE WE DID LAST COUNCIL MEETING.

PLEASE JOIN US WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT

2019 LSARA Membership is only $10.00 Single / $20.00 Family
CLICK ON THE FORM AND IT WILL OPEN 

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT

LSARA CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT YOU

PLEASE FORWARD THIS POST TO YOUR 

FAMILY AND FRIENDS

Read More

LETTERS TO COUNCIL BUT NOT READ #4 & #5 From LSARA

LETTERS TO COUNCIL BUT NOT READ #4 & #5 From LSARA 

We, as an Association, strive to collaborate and work together with Council of the Lac Ste Anne County and wrote a letter on behalf of members and ratepayers, asking simply that LSAC delay the passing of these Bylaws until proper consultation was provided.  

That letter was written on April 7 and delivered via email and accepted by council as information.  We then wrote yet another letter April 12 simply asking that Council look at changing the date of the Public Hearing from a Wednesday to a Saturday when the Electors employed on a regular 9-5 Monday to Wednesday job could attend.  

Once again, this letter was accepted as information only.  No Public Open Houses have ever been scheduled or held to give the residents of Lac Ste Anne the opportunity to understand, collaborate or give input to these two bylaws.  

Important to note as well, Lac Ste Anne and Communities Ratepayers Association never received a response to these letters even acknowledging receipt of same, instead we had to look to the minutes of the Council meeting to see if they were even acknowledged as received.

Letter #4

No reply from LSAC to this letter was provided to the author.

Lac Ste Anne and Communities Ratepayers Association

P.O. Box 574, Onoway, Alberta T0E 1V0 lsaracares@gmail.com

County of Lac Ste. Anne

Box 219

Sangudo, AB

T0E 2A0

April 7, 2019

RE: Borrowing Bylaw 11-2019 Loan Bylaw 12-2019

To: Lac Ste. Anne County Council: Joe Blakeman, Nick Gelych, George Vaughan, Steve Hoyda, Lloyd Giebelhaus, Ross Bohnet, Lorne Olsvik

Without Prejudice:

Please accept this letter as a communication on behalf of Lac Ste. Anne and Communities

Ratepayers Association, hereinafter referred to as LSARA. The LSARA Executive and Directors are
writing to express our concern with respect to the two above noted Bylaws. It is very difficult to have an opportunity to review all of the information that was recently presented April 1, 2019 before the end of April 2019.

With no advance information, Council and Administration put forward a presentation and 2 bylaws,
one to borrow and one to lend, to start with, a million dollars. In this same time frame, Council and
Administration presented the concept of two Corporations; Legacy MLC and ORMC MCC. Both
Bylaws advertised have very condensed timelines. These are not decisions that should be taken
lightly and, in our opinion, should not go forward without extensive Public Consultation. All
Ratepayers in Lac Ste. Anne County should have an opportunity to review, ask and have their
concerns addressed PRIOR to the issuance of the borrowing Bylaws as well as ahead of the
proposed Public Consultation May 1, 2019. There is no opportunity to be properly informed with the
opportunity to provide input in the time lines that are imposed in the advertisement.

While we understand the timelines may be within the guidelines of the Municipal Government Act,
they are not in keeping with the Values of Accountability, Transparency, Collaboration, Trust,
Respect, Integrity, Diversity, Sustainability. If Council does not believe in the above stated, advertised LSAC values, then we respectfully request that the CAO allow an extension on the Petition period for the Borrowing and the Loan Bylaws.

We are very concerned as Ratepayers with our current debt and total debt limits and believe that all
should be afforded the ability to gather all information in order to make an informed decision. We need to understand if there has been rationale applied to these concepts and whether or not this is
something our County should be pursuing in these harsh economic times. For the purpose of ensuring absolute clarity, LSARA wishes to advise that we are not, as a group, representing the Ratepayers of Lac Ste. Anne County against innovation and growth in the community and specifically a Medical Centre. Our point of concern is the formation of two corporations and two borrowing Bylaws which are major steps with potential liabilities. Full disclosure prior to any further action is, in our opinion, imperative. All of this is in the midst of some major changes to the Land Use Bylaws, a highly anticipated LSAC Draft Budget and a Provincial election is overwhelming to most people.

Please consider our request in accommodating a delay until such time as a proper public consultation has taken place. It is our request that Borrowing Bylaw 11-2019 and Loan Bylaw 12-2019
be rescinded and/or second and third readings be postponed to ensure the Ratepayers of Lac Ste. Anne County, the stakeholders, have had every opportunity to be apprised of potential benefits as well as the liabilities.

Your immediate attention to this communication is requested.

Respectfully submitted,

LSARA

Lac Ste. Anne and Communities Ratepayers Association

Letter #5

No reply from LSAC to this letter was provided to the author.

Lac Ste Anne and Communities Ratepayers Association

P.O. Box 574, Onoway, Alberta T0E 1V0 lsaracares@gmail.com

County of Lac Ste. Anne

Box 219

Sangudo, AB

T0E 2A0

April 12, 2019

RE: Borrowing Bylaw 11-2019 Loan Bylaw 12-2019

To: Lac Ste. Anne County Council: Joe Blakeman, Nick Gelych, George Vaughan, Steve Hoyda, Lloyd Giebelhaus, Ross Bohnet, Lorne Olsvik

Without Prejudice:

Please accept this letter as a communication on behalf of Lac Ste. Anne and Communities

Ratepayers Association, hereinafter referred to as LSARA. The LSARA Executive and Directors are

writing to express our concern with respect to the two above noted Bylaws.

Further to our letter of April 7, 2019, we are respectfully asking for the PUBLIC HEARING to be held on a day in which the average working-class residents of the County of Lac Ste Anne may participate in the said Public Hearing. This request would be to respect ALL the residents and hold the Public Hearing on a Saturday, as it was with the Land Use Bylaw Public Hearing of Saturday, March 23, 2019, as well as all the public open houses which were held on a weekend. A public hearing is “an open gathering of officials and citizens, in which citizens are permitted to offer comments. Public Hearings are typically organized as a way to gather public opinions and concerns on political issues before a legislature, agency, or organization makes a decision or takes action”. Given there were no Open House Information Sessions, we do not believe the “Public” has had an adequate opportunity to provide concern, questions or input on a day or time in which they may not be permitted to attend the meeting due to employment restraints. 

We understand time is of the essence here and that ads have gone out but as was demonstrated in the April 1 notification in the Bulletin, the time of the Public Hearing was changed from 10 am to 11 am in the next issue April 8, therefore we believe a date change can also be re-advertised. 

Your attention and a response to this communication is requested immediately given the time frame of all the impending approvals.

Respectfully submitted,

LSARA

Lac Ste. Anne and Communities Ratepayers Association

PLEASE JOIN US WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT

2019 LSARA Membership is only $10.00 Single / $20.00 Family
CLICK ON THE FORM AND IT WILL OPEN 

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT

LSARA CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT YOU

PLEASE FORWARD THIS POST TO YOUR 

FAMILY AND FRIENDS

Read More

LETTERS TO COUNCIL BUT NOT READ #3

LETTERS TO COUNCIL BUT NOT READ #3

At the LSAC Public Hearings of  May 1, 2019 letters sent to Council were received as information only and when asked if these letters would be read aloud, the Reeve indicated that they would not.  We will publish the letters over the next few days each addressing the concerns of the LSAC Legacy Municipal Land Corporation Municipally Controlled Corporation and the ORMC Municipally Controlled Corporation.

Letter #3

No reply from LSAC to this letter was provided to the author.

From: Dale Johnson 
Date: April 10, 2019 at 4:24:21 PM MDT

To: blakeman@lsac.ca, Nick Gelych <ngelych@lsac.ca>, "<lolsvik@lsac.ca>" <lolsvik@lsac.ca>, gvaughan@lsac.ca, Steve Hoyda
<shoyda@lsac.ca>, Ross Bohnet <rbohnet@lsac.ca>, Lloyd Giebelhaus <lgiebelhaus@lsac.ca>

Subject: Legacy Corporation, and $1,000,000.00 Loan

Gentleman,

Firstly thank you to looking towards the future. As a past Health Board Member for 13 years I know the struggles of providing Health care services to
the population. I also understand the need for collaboration among those involved.

I do have concerns however with the increase bureaucracy and financial burden that this "Legacy Corporation" will create. I have seen and heard little
about this until you published the first reading in the Lac Ste Anne Bulletin. I did briefly talk with George asking for an explanation on this idea. I am
totally in favor of improving Health Care delivery to every Albertan no matter where they reside.

From the perspective of a ratepayer I look at how this will help me, then how will it affect my pocket book and then the successes of who will deliver it.
I acknowledge that this will certainly help not only me but many other residents. As the CEO of several businesses in the fields of retail, production and
commercial and residential rental properties I know from past experiences that start ups and rental revenues expected compared to actual are
considerably different. You can expect the unexpected. Most cases more than any budget and plans can forecast. You directly know this from the
construction of the New Administration Building. That project under the direction of the CAO ballooned to an amount that far exceeded the original
Budget. I might add too this was a capital project with advance planning and advanced budgeting and it still far exceeded what was originally reported
to ratepayers by the CAO. Also in my view the procedure for the sale of the old administration building in Sangudo brings questions to my mind. I know
too that some developments between non arms length employees and family members had concessions and requirements differing similar
developments. It's not common knowledge yet, but as you know the County is being sued for $2,300,000.00 over a storage and seizure issue that was
done in a questionable manner. Before your time there were many other questionable directives and purchases under the authority of the CAO that in
my mind are turning out to be a burden to all ratepayers. These burdens will ultimately raise costs. This means two things, raise taxes or decrease
services provided. Adding a $1,000,000.00 loan to an arms length entity adds a whole new set of quantification's. A Bank would be requiring as
Council knows for a loan in that size considerable projections and plans, notwithstanding considerable proof of re-payment and security.

As an Executive Officer of both a Non Profit Organization and a for Profit Company, the operational philosophy between the two are completely
different. The County in no short terms is a Not for profit Organization. It's responsibilities are to provide adequate services for the least possible cost
to it's members (ratepayers in this case). As a Executive Officer I am always evaluated on my performance and achievements, as well my failures.
Unfortunately failures do not come with perks or wage increases. Too many failures mean either reprimand or dismissal. Too many failures also
indicate non qualification to do a job. This is exactly why my confidence lacks with your management, and it's ability to carry out this project, without
major financial or operational issues. The track record is far from perfect, I don't have to tell you that. All you need to do is talk to ratepayers from all
across the County.

I'm confident that saving tax dollars is in the best interest of all of us. Making sure that management doesn't continue to cost tax dollars.
I would certainly appreciate that you slow the process down to allow more confidence building on this project with all involved.

Dale Johnson

780-909-8600

 PLEASE JOIN US WE NEED YOUR SUPPORT

2019 LSARA Membership is only $10.00 Single / $20.00 Family
CLICK ON THE FORM AND IT WILL OPEN 

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT

LSARA CANNOT EXIST WITHOUT YOU

PLEASE FORWARD THIS POST TO YOUR 

FAMILY AND FRIENDS

Read More