SAY NO TO LSAC FOR PROFIT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ~ LAC STE. ANNE AND COMMUNITIES RATEPAYERS ASSOCIATION (LSARA)... Because We Care!

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