ANYONE RECOGNIZE THIS

LAC STE. ANNE COUNTY ASSETS

Anyone recognize this?  This is the Old Administration building on main street in Sangudo. It is our best estimate that the building was listed on December 19th AFTER an offer was received apparently on the 16th of December 2017.  Having that information, LSARA did what we always do, put the questions forward to council and administration regarding the proposed sale of the building.

On December 31, 2017, LSARA sent a letter via email to all the current Councillors and to the CAO. The questions were very pointed with respect to this building that they told us was uninhabitable. Remember?  We HAD to spend 12 million dollars to build a new facility.  Not a WANT, but a NEED is what we were told.

The old administration building is situated on main street in Sangudo and it is on three lots.  We asked how did they arrive at the value of the building and the three lots?  Was a proper appraisal completed prior to listing the property?  The listing itself has no disclosure of the asbestos contamination or any other serious issues that we the Ratepayers were led to believe made this building uninhabitable.

We asked what the policy for liquidation of Municipal Assets was.  LSARA did look for it on the County website that we pay a great deal of money for (that is a topic for another article) and did not find any policy relating to this type of liquidation.  We asked if the policy would meet today's standards and ensure that there are no conflicts of interest in the sale/leases as part of the policy or decision making.

Equally concerning is that there was a motion that was made and passed (812-16) on November 10, 2016 entitled “Direction for old office". Administration was instructed to proceed with a demolition plan and obtain costs to demolish.  There are no minutes anywhere to support that this took place. No report, no further reference so why did it end up for sale?  It is important to understand that once a motion is made, seconded and voted on, it must be adhered to or a new motion must be made to amend the first.  We cannot find any reference to this taking place in the minutes since the motion in November of 2016.

When we speak of roles and responsibilities, it is Councils responsibility to ensure that Administration drafts and updates policies and procedures.  The Planning and Development manager should be responsible for implementing any policy/procedure with respect to disposition of surplus land and buildings.  The fact that no one seemed to know if such policies even exist or if council has inquired about a policy is concerning.  What criteria is utilized for the disposition process?

In that letter of December 30th, 2017, LSARA requested that a proper procedure and policy be implemented for any agreements regarding our assets.  We told them that no further action should be taken with regards to the sale or demolition of the old administration and the three associated lots.  We told them that this is but one of many LSAC assets that will be need to properly appraised and assessed for potential liability in a manner that ensures that LSAC assets are being handled in the fashion that is in the best interest of the Ratepayers in an open and transparent manner.

Fast forward, February 7th and the Agenda is provided on the County website for tomorrows upcoming council meeting. On the agenda, it is listed under item 10.1  Offer to Purchase: 4928-50th Street NW with a link that is not operational from the agenda to us, the ratepayer, AIR-0163: offer to Purchase:4928 50 Street NW -Pdf is how it shows up.

SO, we ask you, the Ratepayers as we asked council and administration, 

• Do you think that there is a process in place that must be followed in order to properly dispense of County assets?  
• Do we think that this sale should be stopped until we are satisfied as Ratepayers that they have investigated the demolition process or if it even is required? 
• What was the demolition requirement based on?
• Do you think that there was a proper appraisal completed?  This cannot be completed by a Realtor, it must be a certified appraiser.  
• Have they completed their due diligence to protect the Ratepayers of this county?  
• Was this a fair practice to List a property AFTER there is an offer? 
• How was it advertised or has it been?

Most land dispositions of this nature are done by way of tender… so that everyone has an equal opportunity.  Not by essentially sandbagging the listing and potentially the sale.

Even though this transaction is slated on the Agenda to be IN CAMERA, we think that it is VERY important that any Ratepayers that have an opportunity to attend Tomorrow, February 8th council meeting at 9:30 AM do so.  

Even though it appears that the Ratepayers Association has been quiet of late, we have remained vigilant in our knowledge seeking, our communications with council and other associations.  Going forward, we will once again be providing information via our blog and our Facebook page.