County of Grande Prairie No 1 Rec Advisory Committee Meeting (TPD1703038)

1. 1.          Attendance
2. 2.          Call to Order
3. 3.          Delegations and Appointments

3.1.      10:00 a.m. Sports Council Update                              Karna Germsheid , AT 10:00

Summary:

Update on Sports Council operations presented by Executive Director Karna Germsheid.

3.2.      10:15 a.m. Wapiti Dunes Development Society

Summary:

Lorraine Howatt & Lynne Spero , AT 10:15

Lorraine and Lynne from Wapiti Dunes Development Society will be in to present an update on their operations.

3.3.      10:30 a.m. Low Income Recreation Access to County Facilities           Kathleen Turner , AT 10:30

Summary:

In December 2016, a County resident requested that Council consider introducing a low income recreation access (LIRA) program comparable to the one offered by the City of Grande Prairie. The item was referred to the December 15 RAC meeting but in the absence of Kathleen Turner, it was deferred to the March 2017 RAC meeting.

Administration has conducted some initial exploratory research  into  existing  local  funding programs to see if their mandate could align with a County LIRA program. It is difficult to determine the exact number of County residents who would qualify for a LIRA program; a Vital Signs study estimated that 531 County residents used the the food bank in 2015, and in 2016, FCSS assisted with 200 applications through their low income tax preparation program.

3.4.      11:00 a.m. 2018 Alberta Summer Games Update

Summary:

Lionel Robins & Lindsey McNeil , AT 11:00

2018 Alberta Summer Games Chairman Lionel Robins, and Games Manager Lindsey McNeil to present an update.

3.5.      11:15 a.m. Bezanson Volunteer Fire Department                                         Wade Doris , AT 11:15

Summary:

Members of the Bezanson Volunteer Fire Department will be in to speak to their event and the financial position of the Society.

3.6.      11:30 a.m. Big Brothers Big Sisters

Summary:

Amy Mohr, Executive Director , AT 11:30

Amy Mohr from Big Brothers, Big Sisters will be in to thank you Council for the support for their 9th annual Ultimate Escape event.

3.7.      1:00 p.m. Crosslink County Sportsplex Update               Ramona Rollins , AT 13:00

Summary:

General Manager Ramona Rollins to present an update as per the attached report.

3.8.      1:15 p.m. AEP County Update                                        Jim Hammond , AT 13:15

Summary:

AEP representatives unable to attend this meeting but are confirmed for the June 15th 2017 RAC meeting. Jim Hammond to provide a short summary.

1. 4.          Unfinished Business

4.1.      Alternative Trail Surfaces

Summary:

Christine Rawlins

Administration were requested to provide more technical information on the life cycle costs of alternative recreational trail surfaces, over and above the information presented at RAC on December 15, 2016.

Extensive research was conducted with limited success – there is very little comparative data available, especially within Canada and specific to northern climates.The most comprehensive published data found was a 2012 research report from Illinois, USA titled “Developing Best Practices for Bicycle Trail Pavement Construction and Maintenance in Illinois” which compared hot mix asphalt (HMA) to concrete to aggregate surfaces over a 20 year period.

That report concluded that while aggregate trails have the lowest initial construction cost, they are the most expensive to maintain (labour), and in that particular research study, that asphalt is almost equal in total cost to aggregate over the life cycle of the trail. Granted, additional savings could be made to the labour and maintenance costs of aggregate trails depending on the volume of use, spectrum of users and service level expectations of the community. However, when the rehabilitation cost percentage was applied to known local Canadian initial trail construction costs, aggregate offers the best total value over a 20 year life cycle.

Trail life expectancy can vary greatly depending on the type of user, volume, climate, and quality of construction. Concrete typically has a lifespan of 20 – 25 years, asphalt 10 – 15 years and aggregate 5 – 8 years.

4.2.      Event Sponsorship Data

Summary:

Christine Rawlins

At the December 19, 2016 Council meeting, Administration was directed by a motion to bring forward

information on sponsorship categories that Council has approved in the past 4-5 years. Data was available for the years 2013 – 2016 inclusive, a four year span. Three main classifications were used:

1: Dine and Dance: Any event or fundraiser with a meal, dancing, tickets to attend. Can include a breakfast or daytime event also.

2: Golf Tournaments: Includes total event, hole sponsorship or sending players to participate

3: Other Event Based Sponsorship: Any event or activity that is somewhat similar to a Dine & Dance or Golf Tournament but falls outside their immediate definition

1. 5.          New Business

5.1.      Mud Bog Land Request

Summary:

Christine Rawlins

Parks & Recreation received a request from Abe Braun to assist with finding a suitable location to hold mud bog races within the County. Mr Braun has approached some private landowners and is seeking to lease 20-30 acres on a 2- 5 year term to host two mud bog events per year.

1. 6.          Sponsorship Requests

6.1.      Sponsorship Request Summary – NEW

Summary:

Christine Rawlins

A summary tool has been created by Administration to provide an overview of the sponsorship requests before they are individually presented at the quarterly RAC meetings. The goal is to provide an “at a glance” snapshot of the requests so that a more comprehensive evaluation of fund allocation can be made.

6.2.      Sponsorship Request – Hospital Bed Races Summary:

Request for Sponsorship.

6.3.      Sponsorship Request – GPRC College Classic Summary:

Request for sponsorship. GPRC is seeking a three year commitment from the County (see attached letter).

6.4.      Sponsorship Request – GPRC Presidents Ball Summary:

Request for sponsorship. GPRC is seeking a three year commitment from the County (see attached letter).

6.5.      Sponsorship Request – Skills Canada                                                                        Rikki Christie

Summary:

Request for sponsorship.

6.6.      Sponsorship Request – South Peace Centennial Museum 50th Anniversary

Summary:

Request for sponsorship.

6.7.      Sponsorship Request – Evergreen High School Rodeo Summary:

Request for sponsorship.

6.8.      Grande Prairie Stompede – Sustainability Fund Summary:

Request for municipal partnership to launch sustainability fund for the 40th anniversary.

1. 7.          Information Items

7.1.      Clairmont Adventure Park Update

Summary:

Christine Rawlins

Administration were requested to contact the Clairmont Agricultural Society to determine the operating costs at the Clairmont Adventure Park.

The current Treasurer advised that the June 1 – October 31, 2016 water expenses were $13,047.42. No other utility information was forthcoming from the group.

7.2.      Regional Recreation Master Plan Update

Summary:

Christne Rawlins

Christine to provide a summary of the March 1st meeting that included regional municipalities. Meeting notes are pending and will be distributed to all Councillors. Next scheduled meeting for the group is June 16, 2017 in Sexsmith.

7.3.      SCORES Invitation Summary:

In a letter to Reeve Beaupre, the County of Grande Prairie was invited to become a member of SCORES – the Standing Committee on Recreational and Educational Services.

7.4.      Campground Reservation Software Update

Summary:

Christine Rawlins

Further to the update provided at the December 2016 RAC meeting, Administration has continued to work towards the launch of a pilot online reservation software for Pipestone Creek campground for the 2017 season. The selected vendor, Campground Automation Systems, has twenty eight clients in Canada (including Entwistle), and an extensive network in USA: http://www.campgroundautomation.com/

7.5.      Columbarium & Cemetery Bylaw Update

Summary:

Christine Rawlins

In 2015, Parks & Recreation Administration were requested to source a columbarium for the Emerson Trail Cemetery. A budget of $30,000 was approved for the project as part of the 2016 Capital plan which was subsequently carried over to the 2017 Capital Plan.

A single 36 niche “grain elevator” themed columbarium has been identified as cost effective, visually pleasing and unique to the region (see the image attached). One end of the columbarium will have the cemetery name and County logo inscribed in the granite. It will be located in the NW corner of the existing cemetery boundary (see site plan attached). Additional stand alone columbariums can be added in the future as demand dictates.

The proposed timeline is: order columbarium March 20 > allow 10-12 weeks delivery > install mid June 2017 > landscape surrounding area July 2017 > niches for sale August 1, 2017.

The cost of a niche is still subject to approval of the Cemetery Bylaw in the coming months, and is proposed to be in the range of $1,000 (upper niche at 12x12x12) or $1,250 (lower niche 12x12x18). Comparative niche prices are: $750 (Whitecourt), $1,100 (Leduc County), $2035 (St. Albert), $2,375 (City of Grande Prairie).

1. 8.          Notice of Motion
2. 9.          Council Inquiries
3. 10.       Addendum
4. 11.       Committee Member Reports
5. 12.       Administrative Reports
6. 13.       Adjournment
7. 3.         Delegations and Appointments

3.1.                          10:00 A.M. SPORTS COUNCIL UPDATE

3.2.                          10:15 A.M. WAPITI DUNES DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY

3.3.                          10:30 A.M. LOW INCOME RECREATION ACCESS TO COUNTY FACILITIES

3.4.                          11:00 A.M. 2018 ALBERTA SUMMER GAMES UPDATE

3.5.                          11:15 A.M. BEZANSON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT

3.6.                          11:30 A.M. BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS

3.7.                          1:00 P.M. CROSSLINK COUNTY SPORTSPLEX UPDATE

3.8.                          1:15 P.M. AEP COUNTY UPDATE

3.1.  10:00 a.m. Sports Council Update

#20170118035

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Scheduled Time : 10:00

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

Update on Sports Council operations presented by Executive Director Karna Germsheid.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

For information

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

For information

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs

3.2.  10:15 a.m. Wapiti Dunes Development Society

#20170119009

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Scheduled Time : 10:15

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

Lorraine and Lynne from Wapiti Dunes Development Society will be in to present an update on their operations.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

Each year, the Wapiti Dunes Development Society applies for $4,000 under the Operating Assistance Grant program to cover insurance for the dunes trails. During the 2016 grants process, Council members that represent the Grande Prairie Area rec board asked administration to invite the Wapiti Dunes Development Society to the RAC to provide an update on the operations and to discuss if the County can support the WDDS by either 1) funding the group annually under community assistance or 2) adding the trails to the County’s insurance policy.

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

1  – Direct administration to work with the County’s Risk Management and Insurance Coordinator to cover the dunes trail in the County’s insurance policy

2  – RAC recommend Council approves an annual grant for the Wapiti Dunes Development Society

3- Take no action (WDDS continues to apply for funding under the Operating Assistance grant program)

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC recommends.

3.3.  10:30 a.m. Low Income Recreation Access to County Facilities

#20170119001

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Scheduled Time : 10:30

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

In December 2016, a County resident requested that Council consider introducing a low income recreation access (LIRA) program comparable to the one offered by the City of Grande Prairie. The item was referred to the December 15 RAC meeting but in the absence of Kathleen Turner, it was deferred to the March 2017 RAC meeting.

Administration has conducted some initial exploratory research into existing local funding programs to see if  their mandate could align with a County LIRA program. It is difficult to determine the exact number of County residents who would qualify for a LIRA program; a Vital Signs study estimated that 531 County residents used the the food bank in 2015,  and  in  2016,  FCSS  assisted  with  200  applications  through  their  low  income tax preparation program.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

The 2016 Grande Prairie Area Joint Recreation Master Plan identified the need to remove barriers (financial, transportation and social) to participation in order to achieve service outcomes and create community benefit. Forty three percent of respondents to the household survey listed “admission fees” as their greatest barrier to recreation. Amongst students surveyed, the top barrier was “admission fees” (42%), while “equipment costs” were a barrier for 22% of student respondents. The Plan also noted the importance of ensuring that all residents are aware of the access programs available to them in their community.

Urban municipalities typically provide some form of affordability / accessibility program for their recreation facilities, and are often linked to a transit subsidy program. At the City of Grande Prairie, the Low Income Recreation Access Program issues low income resident families and individuals a $300 credit per individual to access any City of Grande Prairie owned and operated recreation facilities and registered programs (excluding any independent sports organizations). The credit can be applied towards the cost of activities such as swimming lessons, public skating, summer day camps, and memberships. Residents submit an application through the City’s Community Social Development office and are required to provide proof of income and any declare benefits they may be receiving. The City of Grande Prairie’s LIRA program is currently oversubscribed and was considerably over budget in 2016, possibly due to initial parameters being set too broadly. It also requires a full time administrator.

Financial assistance programs can have significant impact and are effective at meeting the needs of those financially disadvantaged, but often do not close the gap for families that may be above low income cut offs yet still unable to afford participation costs.

Currently, low income County children can access funding for recreation through:

KidSport: Serves children under 18 years and pays program fees up to $200 per child annually. Qualification criteria is based on current household need / AISH / unemployment. In 2014, KidSport in the Grande Prairie area issued $63,100 in support to 258 children and youth to participate in organized  sport. See http://www.kidsportcanada.ca/alberta/grande-prairie/

Jumpstart: Serves children 4 – 18 years and pays $300 per activity to a maximum of $600 per child annually. Also has the Big Play equipment fund for up to $500 per year for children involved in minor

hockey. Funds can go to specific program fees or programs that Jumpstart supports in cooperation with community partners. See: http://jumpstart.canadiantire.ca/en.html

Sports Council: Acts as a referral portal for KidSport and Jumpstart. See: http://gpsportcouncil.ca/knowledge-centre/participants/assistance

Neither KidSport or Jumpstart offer funding for family activities or access to recreation. The City of Grande Prairie’s LIRA program does accommodate family access via the Eastlink Centre where families can engage in recreation collectively.

Other considerations include:

There are no local adult or senior specific organizations that serve as an administrative body that could manage recreation funds for low income persons.

Crosslink County Sportsplex already works with KidSport and is paid directly by KidSport for program fees. Under a LIRA program, families could access drop in field house programs and public skating times, but not the fitness center. Transportation access to the Sportsplex could also be a problem for low income County residents.

Eastlink Centre has acknowledged that theoretically, it could administer a County fund that would allow residents to meet County established criteria and use County recreation funds designated to that facility.

Emerging convention and the 2016 Grande Prairie Poverty report use Low Income Measure After-Tax (LIM-AT)

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

Option 1) Formalize a partnership with an existing local organization such as KidSport on a pilot project basis, and grant a specific amount for KidSport to administer to County children during a calendar year.

Option 2) Request that Administration create, and be directly responsible for a customized Low Income Access to Recreation program incorporating the Crosslink County Sportsplex, Beaverlodge Pool and any other County facilities.

Option 3) Take no action

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs.

Note: Administration recommends that if RAC decides to proceed with a LIRA program, Option 1 is the preferred format on a one year pilot basis with a maximum cap of 200-300 applicants.

City of Grande Prairie Low Income Access Programs

Qualifying low income families and individuals, residing within the City of Grande Prairie boundaries can access two types of assistance programs through the City of Grande Prairie. Providing opportunities for individuals in our community to improve their health and well-being is a top priority for the City of Grande Prairie. The aim of these programs is to encourage all citizens to have access to City run recreation facilities and transit.

Low Income Recreation Access

• $300.00 credit per individual, to access any City of Grande Prairie recreation facility including the Eastlink Centre, Dave Barr Arena, Muskoseepi Park, Coca-Cola Centre and registered programs (excluding any independent sports organizations).

• The credit can be applied towards the cost of activities such as swimming lessons, public skating, summer day camps, yearly memberships and much more!

• Once approved, a verification letter will be sent to your mailing address. You can then use the credit by giving your name and phone number at any City of Grande Prairie operated recreation facility.

Low Income Transit Access

• Free monthly passes are issued to qualifying low income individuals and families to access the City of Grande Prairie’s transit system.

• Once approved, a verification letter will be sent to your mailing address and passes can be picked up in person on or after the 20th of every month at two City of Grande Prairie locations;

► Community Social Development front desk (10030-102 Avenue) 8:30 a.m.-12 noon and 1 p.m.-4:30 p.m.

► Muskoseepi Park- Ernie Radbourne Pavilion reception area (intersection of 102 St and 102 Ave) Monday- Friday 8:30 a.m. to 9 p.m.

Saturday & Sunday 12 noon to 6 p.m. (October- April) Statutory Holiday 12 noon to 6 p.m. (unless otherwise posted).

When accessing your pass, please bring your current photo ID with current Grande Prairie address.

Please complete this application form, attach the required documents and send to us thru mail, fax or hand deliver to:

Mailing Address:

COMMUNITY SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT PO BAG 4000

City of Grande Prairie T8V 6V3

Building Address:

COMMUNITY SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT

10030 102 Avenue Grande Prairie, AB

Fax Number:

780-830-5025

Incomplete applications will be followed up by phone call to inform you of the missing information. Every application is important to us and will be processed in the order received to ensure fairness to all. The current processing time is 3-4 weeks from the date received at the Community Social Development Office, which may change based on the volume of applications received. If you have any questions or additional information please contact

Community Social Development Front Desk at 780.538.0380

Please check the box if you are applying for

1)     o Low Income Transit Pass

Once approved, passes can be picked up in person on or after the 20th of every month at two City of Grande Prairie locations; Community Social Development front desk (10030-102 Ave) and

Muskoseepi Park – Ernie Radbourne Pavilion reception area (intersection of 102 St and 102 Ave) When accessing your pass, please bring your current photo ID with current Grande Prairie address.

2)     o Low Income Recreation Access

MAIN APPLICANT INFORMATION- USE LEGAL NAMES

ADDITIONAL FAMILY INFORMATION

If more room is needed, please attach additional sheet.

Is/ are your child or children receiving a student TRANSIT pass from the school? o Yes    o NO

If YES reason for child/ children applying for bus pass                                                                                      

If NO reason for child/ children applying for bus pass                                                                                     

REQUIRED VERIFICATION DOCUMENTS

PROOF OF INCOME-Please select ONE of the following that applies to you.

o I am on AISH

Individuals receiving AISH can access City run facilities free of charge. If you are wanting to access registered programming, please provide a current monthly Medical Service statement.

o I am on Income Support

Please provide a copy of your Direct Deposit Statement.

o I have a plastic Health Benefits Card

Please provide a copy of your Health Benefits Card AND a copy of your renewal letter with expiry date. If you do not have a copy, please contact 780.427.6848 to request a copy.

o My household income is at or under the amount listed below

Please provide ONE of the following for YOURSELF AND YOUR PARTNER if applicable:

• Last year’s Income Tax Notice of Assessment (NOA) – If you do not have a copy of your NOA, please obtain a copy by calling the Canada Revenue Agency at 1-800-959-8281 or visit www.cra.gc.ca/myaccount.

Add the total incomes from line 150 of last year’s NOA for you and your partner (if applicable) only. You are eligible if your household income is equal to or less than amounts listed below.

• 3 Most recent pay stubs- income will be calculated by estimated gross income for the year based on the 3 most current payments issued.

o I am a new Immigrant or a Refugee- must be within ONE year from arrival

Please provide a copy of the front and back of each family member’s Permanent Resident Card OR a copy of your family Confirmation or Permanent Residence paper OR a copy of your Refugee Protection Claimant document.

PROOF OF GRANDE PRAIRIE RESIDENCY

The Low Income Access Program is for City of Grande Prairie residents only. Please provide ONE of the following documents to verify your current Grande Prairie address. We will accept the document with you or your partner’s name. We will NOT accept documents with a PO Box address or tenancy agreements.

o Current bill from a utility company such as phone, gas, cable or energy provider

o Current bank or credit card statement that was mailed to your current building address

o Government issued letter or notice

SIGNATURE

I,_______________________________ , verify that the information I have provided in this application is true and accurate

to the best of my knowledge. I acknowledge that knowingly making a false or fraudulent application shall be considered sufficient cause for refusal of my application for the Low Income Access Program.

____________________________________

Applicant Signature                                                Date

_____________________________________

THIS PERSONAL INFORMATION IS BEING COLLECTED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF CITY OF GRANDE PRAIRIE AND WILL BE USED TO DETERMINE CLIENT ELIGIBILITY UNDER THE LOW INCOME RECREATION ACCESS PROGRAM. IT IS PROTECTED BY THE PRIVACY PROVISIONS OF THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY ACT. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE COLLECTION CONTACT (FOIP COORDINATOR, CITY OF GRANDE PRAIRIE, PH. 780-538-0338/FX. 780-539-1056)

COMMUNITY

TO END POVE

NOVEMBER 2016

GRANDE PRAIRIE POVERTY PROFILE

Prepared by: M. Haener Consulting Services

Building awareness of p community

Community Action to End Poverty would like to acknowledge and express appreciation to the organizations this project:

St. Paul’s United Church

Society for Pregnant and Parenting Teens

Grande Prairie Public School District

NATIVE COUNSELLING SERVICE OF ALBERTA

As well as the following local Government of Alberta offices:

Alberta Works, Human Services

Community Addictions Services, Alberta Health Services

Table of Contents

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Background…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

What  is poverty?…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

How is Poverty measured? …………………………………………………………………………………………..

Grande Prairie Context …………………………………………………………………………………………………..

What is the poverty rate? …………………………………………………………………………………………….

Who is poor in Grande Prairie? ……………………………………………………………………………………..

What is the impact of living costs?…………………………………………………………………………………

What does poverty cost our community? ……………………………………………………………………….

How is poverty affecting our citizens and community agencies? ………………………………………..

Appendix A: Comparison of Low Income Measures …………………………………………………………….

Appendix B: Low Income Thresholds ………………………………………………………………………………..

Appendix C: Statistics Canada Definitions ………………………………………………………………………….

Appendix D: LIM-AT by Family Type and Composition …………………………………………………………

Appendix E: Median Hourly Wage Rates in Alberta …………………………………………………………….

INTRODUCTION

Grande Prairie is not unique from other communities in that poverty and its effects can pose a challenging obstacle in the journey towards sustainability. In recognition of the need to address poverty within the community, Grande Prairie’s Community Action to End Poverty (CAEP) Committee was established in 2012.

Through CAEP, the foundation for action has been initiated. A vision and mission have been developed; community partnerships have been formed and collaborative discussion fostered; specific research has also been conducted.

CAEP wants to build upon this foundation by strengthening understanding and awareness of poverty and its impacts within Grande Prairie and generating support for actions that will lead to real change within the community.

Guided by recent poverty publications, this report responds to the following general questions:

What is poverty?

How is poverty measured?

And for Grande Prairie specifically;

What is the poverty rate?

What is the impact of living costs?

What does poverty cost our community?

How is poverty affecting our citizens and community agencies?

BACKGROUND

What is poverty?

For some people, poverty is synonymous with homelessness. Although the inability to secure affordable housing can be part of an individual’s experience of living in poverty, the incidence and impact of poverty reaches well beyond the homeless population.

Not surprisingly, there is no universal definition of poverty or official description of what it means to be poor².

However, the lack of access to resources is often recognized as an important element of living in poverty. This concept is highlighted in the definitions put forward by poverty reduction organizations in other Alberta communities:

Poverty is a lack of resources and opportunities to achieve a standard of living that allows full participation in the economic, social, cultural, educational, and political spheres of society (Vibrant Communities Calgary, 2012).

Poverty occurs when people lack, or are denied, economic, social and cultural resources to have a quality of life that sustains and facilitates full and meaningful participation in the community (The End Poverty in Edmonton Task Force, 2014).

In 2012, CAEP established its own working definition of poverty (see sidebar). CAEP’s

definition reflects the concept of basic rights. The sentiment that poverty undermines basic human rights is supported by many organizations including the United Nations.³

¹ Alberta Human Services (2013). An Analysis of Poverty in Alberta.

² In this report, “poor” is used to describe individuals and families living in poverty.

³ See for example, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) description of poverty at http://www.unesco.org/ sciences/themes/international-migration/glossary/poverty/

The concept of deprivation or the “the lack of socially perceived necessities” has also been used to describe what it means to be poor. In Poverty Costs 2.5, deprivation is described as a living situation characterized by social isolation, inability to exercise control over one’s life, and extreme difficulty in making choices. These factors are further related to the day-to-day experience of living in

Social isolation is intensified for poor people when they cannot contribute to or participate in family and community celebrations, leisure activities or pursue hobbies and special interests. The lack of affordable and safe housing, appropriate clothing, transportation and dental care limits the ability to exercise control over one’s life and to secure a good job. Financial insecurity means having to make difficult choices between nutritious and regular meals, keeping warm and paying the rent.

How is Poverty measured?

There is no official poverty measure in Canada; however, the Statistics Canada publishes “statistics on Canadians with low-incomes, which is a key dimension of poverty” (Statistics Canada, 2012)⁴. These low income thresholds are often referenced in poverty literature: Low Income Measure; Low Income Cut-off; and Market Basket Measure.

Appendix A compares Statistic Canada’s description of each of these measures. The share of population whose income falls below one of these threshold are often used as an indicator of the prevalence of poverty.

The Poverty Costs report concludes that of the Low Income Measure After-Tax (LIM-AT) is the best choice amongst low income thresholds. According to the report:

Though the Low Income Cut-Off has been popular to date as a low-income measure, it has not been updated in a meaningful way since 1992, except to account for inflation. LIM-AT is an easily understood measure that does not change by a region’s population (unlike LICO) and it is updated annually by Statistics Canada⁵.

To fall in line with emerging convention, this report uses LIM-AT.

There are recognized limitations associated with relying on low-income measures as indicators of poverty. In response, some jurisdictions have established of deprivation indicators based on a set of living conditions typically associated with living in poverty. According to the Poverty Costs 2.5 report, deprivation indices are the new standard in measuring poverty and recommends that the Government of Alberta develop a general deprivation index⁶.

Other measures used of indicators of poverty within a specific community often convey information about the use of various services typically accessed by low income individuals, such as food banks and social and income assistance programs.

4 Statistics Canada further states that it “does not define ‘poor’ nor does it estimate the number of poor families and individuals in Canada”.

⁵ Hudson, C.A. (2014). Poverty Costs 2.5: Investing in Albertans. Calgary: Vibrant Communities Calgary and Action to End Poverty in Alberta, p. 8.

⁶ For more information, see the methodological available from Alberta Health at: http://www.ahw.gov.ab.ca/IHDA_Retrieval/ShowMetaDataNotesS

GRANDE PRAIRIE CONTEXT

What is the poverty rate?

As noted in a previous section, low income thresholds are often used to infer the poverty rate that applies to a specific population. This report uses LIM-AT which is emerging as the standard amongst published low income thresholds.

In 2014, 8.7% of households (census families and persons not in census families) in Grande Prairie had incomes below the LIM-AT⁷. This compares to 12.1% for Alberta overall.

Although many factors influence the proportion of households that fall below the LIM-AT threshold each year, unemployment plays a strong role. The chart in the sidebar shows that the inferred poverty rate has been correlated with changes in unemployment levels⁸. In 2008 when the economy faltered, unemployment rose as did poverty rates. The climb was steeper in Grande Prairie’s Economic Region than Alberta overall but the recovery was as faster as well. This reflects the heightened susceptibility of the region “boom-bust” cycles.

More recent data shows that after climbing in 2015, the unemployment rate has steadily fallen in 2016. Given the historical correlation, this also suggests that the proportion of the population living in low income has also decreased.

⁷ Households is used to refer to the aggregate of census families and persons not in census families which are defined in Appendix B.

⁸ Comparable time series data for City of Grande Prairie not available; therefore, the Economic Region of Banff-Jasper-Rocky Mountain House and A Peace River is used. Data source is CANSIM table 282-0121 which is derived from Statistic Canada’s Labour Force Survey.

Who is poor in Grande Prairie?

In 2013, Alberta Human Services released An Analysis of Poverty in Alberta⁹. The overall findings of the Alberta Human Services report indicate that certain sub- populations within the province are at greater risk of poverty (see sidebar). This statement is also true for Grande Prairie.

The Alberta Human Services report used a tool called the Poverty Matrix to guide its analysis of prevalence of poverty differs across demographic groups. Vibrant Communities Canada sponsored the development of the Poverty Matrix in order to support communities engaged in its Cities Reducing Poverty initiative¹⁰. For this report, the Poverty Matrix approach is also used to outline how the prevalence of poverty, measured using LIM-AT, varies for different demographic groups within Grande Prairie.

Statistics Canada indicates that it is valid to compare low-income data for different sub-populations (i.e., for different geographic areas or demographic groups) within a survey product like the National Household Survey. However, it may not be appropriate to compare data derived from different survey products due to variation in survey methodologies ¹¹. When interpreting low income data, it is also important to keep in mind the possibility of underreporting bias. As stated, in the Alberta Human Services report (p. 3):

…estimates of poverty for at-risk groups, particularly when those estimates are based on survey data, are subject to potential bias as a result of underreporting. As a result, in some instances, the estimates of the incidence of poverty are likely to be under estimated.

⁹ Prepared by Applications Management Consulting Ltd., Edmonton, Alberta.

¹⁰ Tamarack- An Institute for Community Engagement. (2004). The Poverty Matrix: Understanding Poverty in Your Community. Available at: www.vi

¹¹ Statistics Canada, 2011 National Household Survey, Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 99-014-X2011043.

Family Type and Composition

The Analysis of Poverty in Alberta report finds that in 2006 the most powerful predictor of low-income status was family type. Based on 2013 LIM-AT data, this continues to hold true and also applies to Grande Prairie.

The prevalence of poverty is lowest for couple families and significantly lower in Grande Prairie (3.3%) than in Alberta overall (6.0%). The risk of poverty is elevated for persons not living in census families; however, again, less so in Grande Prairie compared to the province overall.

It is a different scenario for lone parent families; they are much more likely to fall below the LIM-AT threshold with the prevalence slightly greater in Grande Prairie (31.8%) than provincially (30.6%). Examining lone parent families by number of children shows that half of all lone parent families with 3 or more children are poor¹².

Clearly, the challenges faced by lone parent families place them at very high risk of poverty and its myriad of impacts.

The above discussion indicates that children living with a lone parent family are at much greater risk of poverty. This is confirmed when examining data specific to children (persons aged 0-17) by family type; prevalence of poverty for children in lone parent families is 45.7% and 4.8% for those in couple families.

The overall child poverty rate in Grande Prairie was 12.9% in 2013 based on LIM-AT.

¹² Additional data related to LIM-AT by family type and composition is provided in Appendix D. Data source is CANSIM table 111-0015 which is deriv

Both provincially and in Grande Prairie lower levels of education are associated with higher rates of poverty but the impact is less significant in Grande Prairie. However, it should be kept in mind that education levels in Grande Prairie are lower than provincial levels; about 16% of Grande Prairians between age 25 and 64 do not have a high school diploma compared to about 12% of Albertans. This is an important factor in understanding poverty risk given that research demonstrates that individuals with lower education levels experience less stable employment levels particularly in times of economic downturn¹⁴.

EMPLOYMENT STATUS

Employment Sector

As noted in the previous section, even those that are employed experience poverty. Some jobs provide insufficient income to cover household expenses putting workers at risk of poverty. Statistics Canada data shows that wage levels in Alberta vary considerably by occupation (see Appendix E); therefore it is not surprising that poverty risk is higher for certain occupations. Individuals employed in retail trade, arts, entertainment and recreation; and accommodation and food service are at highest risk of being poor.

Later in this report, information is provided on living costs in Grande Prairie and the local Living Wage rate which provides further insight into the challenges faced by low wage workers.

Ethnicity

Discrimination is known to create systemic barriers and influence social outcomes for certain groups. Not surprisingly, individuals that identify as a visible minority or as Aboriginal are at higher risk of poverty¹⁵. In Grande Prairie, almost one quarter of individuals who identify as Aboriginal are classified as low income.

Immigration Status

Newcomers to Canada face many challenges including finding housing and employment, cultural adjustment, and learning to navigate everyday life in a new community. Higher poverty rates for immigrants and non-permanent residents may be related to these challenges¹⁶.

¹⁵ Aboriginal identity is defined in Appendix C.

¹⁶ Immigrant and non-permanent resident are defined in Appendix C.

Mobility Status

Poverty prevalence is also related to mobility status¹⁷. Individuals who change their residence, or movers, are more likely to have low income levels. The greater the move, the higher the risk.

For those that moved from outside Canada (external migrants) in the previous year, the rate of low income is almost 40% across Canada and even higher in Grande Prairie at just over 50%.

However, the correlation between mobility status and low income prevalence fades over time. Five years after moving, poverty risk for all movers and, external migrants in particular, drops considerably. In Grande Prairie, poverty risk for external migrants falls by more than half down to just over 20%.

¹⁷ Definitions related to mobility status are provided in Appendix C.

What is the impact of living costs?

For the last several years, the Canadian Living Wage Framework developed by Vibrant Communities Canada has been used to guide Living Wage calculations for Grande Prairie¹⁸. The estimation of household expenses under conservative spending assumptions is a key component of the Living Wage calculation.

The 2015 estimate of household expenses shows that shelter, child care, and food account for a large proportion of household budgets. Low income households are particularly vulnerable to increased costs in these budget areas.

Living Wage estimates tells us about:

The amount of income an individual or family requires to meet their basic needs, to maintain a safe, decent standard of living in their communities and to save for future needs and goals (Vibrant Communities Calgary, 2012).

With Living Wage estimates consistently above the minimum wage, low wage earners in Grande Prairie are challenged to make ends meet despite accounting for government subsidies and credits. Further, with increases in the Living Wage occurring since 2012, the challenge has become increasing difficult. The exception was a slight decline in the 2015 Living Wage for a Lone Parent with one child which was, in part, due to changes to the City of Grande Prairie’s Low Income Access programs which had the greatest proportional impact on this household’s expenses.

¹⁸ More information related to Grande Prairie’s Living Wage is available at http://www.cityofgp.com/index.html?page=2294

What does poverty cost our community?

Although the negative impacts of poverty on individuals, families, and communities are often discussed qualitatively, quantifying the costs is a difficult task. However, communicating the economic costs of poverty can be a powerful tool in building community awareness and engagement.

In 2012, Poverty Costs: An Economic Case for a Preventative Poverty Reduction Strategy in Alberta estimated the health care, crime, intergenerational and opportunity costs associated with

19

poverty . In 2013, Alberta Human Services’ An Analysis of Poverty

in Alberta report used methodology similar to that used in Poverty Costs to estimate these same costs for Alberta using 2006 Census data.

Both reports look at the cost savings associated with raising the income levels of the low-income sub-population as a proxy for the cost of perpetuating poverty²⁰.

In this report, LIM-AT has been used as a poverty indicator and therefore, it is also used to identify the subpopulation for purposes of estimating the costs of poverty within Grande Prairie.

¹⁹ Briggs, A. & Lee, C.R. (2012). Poverty Costs: An Economic Case for a Preventative Poverty Reduction Strategy in Alberta. Calgary: Vibrant Communi End Poverty in Alberta.

²⁰ The Poverty Costs report uses the poorest 20% of Alberta’s population to represent the low-income subpopulation. However, the Alberta Human population categorized as low-income using LIM-BT which is a more conservative approach.

Health Care

Both the Poverty Costs and An Analysis of Poverty in Alberta reports use family practitioner consultation and hospital usage data of the population classified as living in poverty relative to that of higher income earners to estimate costs. The analysis relies on the assumption that increasing incomes of the lower income earners will eliminate the difference in health service use²¹.

For this analysis, the difference in health care utilization is applied to the population identified as low income using LIM-AT. The resulting total cost estimate is about $17 million.

²¹ Note that it is appears that a methodological error occurred in both studies in that per resident changes were applied to numbers of families as o of individuals.

²² Using 5,950 persons or 2,950 families as appropriate.

²³ Based on current schedule of benefits and fee code 303A. See www.health.alberta.ca/professionals/SOMB.html

²⁴ Based on current per diem rate available from http://www.health.alberta.ca/documents/Hospital-Reciprocal-Claims-Guide.pdf

Crime Costs

The Poverty Costs report estimates that the cost of crime attributable to poverty in Alberta is 4% ($560 million in 2009). This estimate can be used to infer a cost per person experiencing poverty ($136.54 based on 410,150 low income persons using LIM AT) and then applied to the number of low-income persons in Grande Prairie. The resulting estimate is $0.812 million in 2009 dollars and when adjusted for inflation, about $0.9 million in 2015 dollars.

Intergenerational Costs

Intergenerational transfer of poverty occurs when children who grow up in poverty remain in poverty and are unable to escape it. Knowledge of intergenerational income mobility has been used to help quantify the cost of this impact of poverty. According to the Poverty Costs report, “Canadian studies estimate that the percentage of children who are likely to remain in poverty at 20

– 25% of those who grew up in poverty (p. 29). This suggests that of the 2,280

be expected to remain in poverty.

children identified as living in low income in Grande Prairie, 456-570 children can

Following a similar methodology as that used in An Analysis of Poverty in Alberta report, lost income is inferred to be the amount of income needed to raise the incomes of 20% or 456 individuals from the median income level of low income persons to the median income level of all persons. Lost tax revenue is the difference between the expected tax revenue that would have been paid if individuals remained in low income compared to the tax that would be paid at the overall median income level.

The lost income and tax revenue calculations are shown below.

$51.5 m

is the an estimate opportunity

The resulting lost income and tax revenue is about $13.5 million and $1.5,

respectively, for a total of $$15.0 million in intergenerational costs per year.

Opportunity Costs

The Poverty Costs report (p. 31) defines the opportunity costs of poverty as:

poverty in Prairie in t

the costs associated with the lost private revenue when individuals are un- or under-

lost income

employed, as well as the lost tax revenue from those who are un- or under-employed.

By assuming that those living in poverty are able to work more or earn more, and that

reven

they are likely to do so if they are able, an approach similar to that used in the Poverty

Costs report is used to calculate intergenerational costs of poverty in Grande Prairie²⁵.

²⁵ In its An Analysis of Poverty in Alberta report Alberta Human Services uses a much more complex approach to estimate opportunit data sources not available for this analysis.

Lost income is inferred using the difference between the median income level of all low income earners and the poverty threshold. Lost tax revenue is the difference between the tax revenue expected to be paid by low income earners and the tax revenue that would be expected if income levels were above the poverty threshold. As shown below, the total resulting cost impact is about $51.5 million.

Total External Cost

The total estimate of the external costs of poverty in Grande Prairie in 2015 dollars is

$84.4 million.

²⁶ Includes persons not in census families (i.e. single persons without dependents).

How is poverty affecting our citizens and community?

Local agencies that work directly with individuals and families experiencing poverty in Grande Prairie have valuable insigh for our City’s poor. This is particularly true right now given that the City has recently gone through significant demograph that is not yet reflected in data related to low income and poverty.

CAEP asked local agencies to their perspectives on the impacts of poverty on individuals and families and the broader co submitted from fourteen different organizations. The remainder of this section highlights several themes from those sub

Financial Hardship and Crisis

Being poor results in ongoing financial hardship as well as a lack of financial resiliency. The risk of falling into crisis is high because of insufficient disposable income or savings to deal with unexpected events or emergencies and potential delays in receiving support.

Homelessness

As mentioned earlier in this report, although not synonymous, poverty and homelessness are interconnected.

The limited supply of affordable housing within Grande Prairie amplifies the risk of being both poor and homeless.

Child Development

Statistics presented earlier in this report indicate that the risk of poverty in Grande Prairie is elevated for children.

There are everyday tangible impacts of appropriate nutrition and clothing as well as less visible impacts like stress and decreased home support.

The longer term cumulative impact of child poverty within our community is lost human capital.

Education

Lower levels of education are associated with higher risk of poverty.

Living in poverty presents unique educational challenges for children and young adults higher level of education, poverty can present barriers that are difficult to overcome for those impacted.

Health

Several agencies mentioned the detrimental impact of poverty on the physical and mental health of individuals and families.

The ongoing burden of trying to get by on a limited income can lead to chronic stress and impact mental health.

Individuals and families living in low income often have limited flexibility in their monthly budget. Unavoidable costs associated with disability and chronic health conditions may be impossible to accommodate. People may be forced to choose between medically necessary prescriptions and travel and basic necessities. In some case, they elect forgo purchasing prescriptions and traveling for necessary procedures and subsequently put their health further at risk.

Need for Resources and Supports

In light of the many impacts identified, it is not surprising that as the prevalence of poverty increases so does the demand for an array of resources and supports—not just financial supports.

For some individuals and families, learning about the programs and resources available, understanding eligibility criteria and completing necessary paperwork can be overwhelming. Transportation can also be a barrier for some individuals. Being able to afford the bus fare necessary to get to support program locations may be out of reach.

The resource dependent nature of Grande Prairie’s economy can change the demand for supports and services, quickly and unexpectedly.

APPENDIX A: COMPARISON OF LOW INCOME MEASUR

CA – Census Agglomeration; CMA – Census Metropolitan Area

Market Income is income before taxes and transfers. Total income is income from all sources including government tran deduction of federal and provincial income taxes. It may also be called income before tax (but after transfers). After-tax i less income tax.

27 Disposable income is defined as the sum remaining after deducting the following from total family income: total income taxes paid; the personal portion of payroll t deductions such as contributions to employer-sponsored pension plans, supplementary health plans, and union dues; child support and alimony payments made to an spending on child care; and non-insured but medically prescribed health-related expenses such as dental and vision care, prescription drugs, and aids for persons with

APPENDIX B: LOW INCOME THRESHOLDS

LIM by Income Source and Household Size, 201328

Low Income Cut-offs by Household Size, After-Tax, 201329

Market Basket Measure, Reference Family of 2 adults and 2 children, Alberta, 2013

²⁸ Statistics Canada. Table 206-0091 – Low income measures (LIMs) by income source and household size, annual, (2013 constant dol (accessed: January 27, 2016)

²⁹ Statistics Canada. Table 202-0092 – Low income cut-offs before and after tax by community and family size, 2013 constant dollars CANSIM (database). (accessed: Dec 1, 2015)

APPENDIX C: STATISTICS CANADA DEFINITIONS

‘Aboriginal identity’ includes persons who reported being an Aboriginal person, that is, First Nations (North American Ind (Inuit) and/or those who reported Registered or Treaty Indian status, that is registered under the Indian Act of Canada, a reported membership in a First Nation or Indian band. Aboriginal peoples of Canada are defined in the Constitution Act, including the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada.

‘Census families’ include: 1) couples (married or common-law, including same-sex couples) living in the same dwelling wi and 2) single parents (male or female) living with one or more children. Persons who are not matched to a family become families. They may be living alone, with a family to whom they are related, with a family to whom they are unrelated or w in census families.

‘Immigrant’ refers to a person who is or has ever been a landed immigrant/permanent resident. This person has been gr Canada permanently by immigration authorities.

‘Mobility status’ refers to the status of a person with regard to the place of residence on the reference day, May 10, 201 place of residence on the same date one year earlier. Persons who have not moved are referred to as non-movers and pe from one residence to another are referred to as movers. Movers include non-migrants and migrants. Non-migrants are but remained in the same city, town, township, village or Indian reserve. Migrants include internal migrants who moved t township, village or Indian reserve within Canada. External migrants include persons who lived outside Canada at the ear

‘Non-permanent resident’ refers to a person from another country who has a work or study permit, or who is a refugee Canadian-born family member living in Canada with them.

APPENDIX D: LIM-AT BY FAMILY TYPE AND COMPOSI

APPENDIX E: MEDIAN HOURLY WAGE RATES IN ALBE

Alberta, 2015, All Employees, 15 Years and Over by Occupation Category

Manufacturing and utilities                                                          $23.50

Natural resources, agriculture and related production                                                                  $26.44

Trades, transport & equipment operators and related                                                                      $28.50

Sales and service                                        $15.00

Art, culture, recreation & sport                                                         $22.50

Educ, law & social, community & gov. services                                                                         $29.67

Health                                                                             $32.00

Natural and applied sciences and related                                                                                                                                                            $38.46

Business, finance and administration occupations                                                               $25

Management occupations                                                                                                                                    $41.03

Source: Statistics Canada. Table 282-0152 – Labour force survey estimates (LFS), wages of employees by type of work, Na Classification (NOC), annual (current dollars), CANSIM (database). (accessed: March 17, 2016)

A low income individual (and children from low income households) in the city of Grande Prairie have access to a program called Low Income Recreation Access (a part of Community Social Development) through the City’s FCSS. The program provides funding for eligible individuals, allowing access for swimming and sports lessons as well as access to leisure facilities. Please see attached LIA application form documen*t for eligibility requirements of applicants. Through the program, eligible individuals receive a set amount per year towards lessons/access at designated facilities.

For residents of the County, there is no comparable program.

County residents (and their children) that fall in this category are somewhat of an invisible population in regard to advocating for their needs, for the following reasons:

• often folks in the lowest income brackets hold minimum wage jobs, where they work many and long hours to make ends meet
• many low income families have one or both adults in the home that have mental health issues or physical disabilities
• People with low income often do not have ready internet access, and are not even aware of any programs that would benefit them

In summation to the above points, this population  very rarely has the resources or time to advocate or ask for this type of programming. But there is a real need for a program in the county.

A recent Grande Prairie Poverty study* revealed a sizable low income population…and the County is certainly comparable, and probably has an even higher demographic in this category.

There legitimate need for a comparable program for the County of Grande Prairie residents.

Many cities in Alberta have programs for low income resident accessibility. Please find attached the information for the Leduc(Leduc Recreation Assistance Program)* as well as the (Leisure Access Program, City of Edmonton)* program. There are different models in this program.

Additionally, it would be imperative that the accessibility of a future county program include access to swimming facilities. Please find a copy of the Canadian Drowning Report*, Prepared for the Lifesaving Society Canada by the Drowning Prevention Research  Centre Canada. Swimming is  an Essential Life Skill.

Sincerely, Maurissa Hietland

*indicates attached documents

Appendix 4 for 3.3.: CLS Drowning Report

DROWNING

2015 Edition

Prepared for the Lifesaving Society Canada by the Drowning Prevention Research Centre Canada

Change in Number of Preventable Water-Related Deaths and Death Rates in Canada, 1993–2012

624

The significant long-term progress that has been made in reducing death by drowning in Canada is evident in the latest data. The water-related death rate has fallen steadily over the past 20 years, from an average of

2.1

1993–1997

486

1.6

1998–2002

473

1.5

2003–2007

478

1.4

2008–2012

2.1 per 100,000 population each year in the mid-1990s (1993–1997) to a yearly average of 1.4 per 100,000 population in the most recent data (2008–2012).

Despite the encouraging decrease in the death rate, the number of drownings in Canada remains high. There were 495 water-related fatalities in Canada in 2012—the most recent year for which complete data are available from the offices of provincial/territorial Chief Coroners and Chief Medical Examiners. This is the highest number since 2006, reinforcing the need for continued strong drowning prevention efforts. Over the most recent five-year period (2008–2012), there were 2,392 drowning fatalities, an average of 478 each year.

For drownings since 2012, only preliminary interim data from media and Internet reports are available. The table on the following page indicates that at least 359 drownings occurred in 2013 and at least 308 occurred in 2014.

Number of Preventable Water-Related Deaths in Canada, 1990–2012

Appendix 4 for 3.3.: CLS Drowning Report

Number of Preventable Water-Related Deaths in Canada,

2013 and 2014

Note: The numbers in this table are preliminary interim data from media and Internet reports.

WHO

DROWNED?

AGE

The average age of drowning victims in Canada between 2008 and 2012 was 42.8 years. The highest death rates in 2008–2012 were found among young adults aged 20 to 34 years and seniors 65 and older (both

1.7 per 100,000 population), similar to the previous five-year period (2003–2007). Within these age ranges, the age groups with the highest death rates were 20- to 24-year-olds and 80- to 84-year-olds (both 2.0 per 100,000 population). Moreover, 20- to 24-year-olds had the largest number of drowning deaths (228) of all age groups.

High rates were also found among baby boomers 50 to 64 years of age (1.5 per 100,000) and adults 35 to 49 years of age (1.4 per 100,000). Encouragingly, both of these rates have decreased slightly from the previous five-year period (down from 1.6 and 1.5, respectively).

Drowning prevention education efforts directed at parents with young children appear to be having an impact. There has been a long-term trend toward decreasing death rates among children less than 5 years of age in Canada. This trend continued in 2008–2012 with a death rate of

1.1 for this age group (down 8% from 1.2 in 2003–2007).

Age Group

Number of Preventable Water-Related Deaths and Death Rates in Canada, 2008–2012

TPD1703038

2                                                                                                                             CanadianDrowningRepPoargte–4240o1f51E8d0ition

Appendix 4 for 3.3.: CLS Drowning Report

GENDER

The vast majority of drowning victims continued to be male. Of the 2,392 people who drowned between 2008 and 2012, 1,968 (82%) were male. The skew toward male victims is evident across all age groups, but is most pronounced among young adults 20 to 34 years of age. In this age group, 9 out of 10 drowning victims were male. Nevertheless, in 2012, 106 or 21% of drowning victims were female. This is the highest proportion of female victims reported in the last 10 years.

ETHNICITY

Previous studies suggested that people who are new to Canada are at a higher risk of drowning. In 2010, the Drowning Prevention Research

Centre began collecting data on the country of birth of drowning victims and the length of time they had been living in Canada.

Unfortunately, country of birth could not be determined in over 60% of the cases, and information on the number of years lived in Canada was even more difficult to obtain. From cases where the information was available, 50 drowning victims (since 2010) were reported to have

been born in Africa, Asia or Europe. More work is needed to improve the collection of this information.

During 2008–2012, 229 or 10% of drowning victims were reported as being Aboriginal—significantly greater than the approximately 4% of the Canadian population who identify as an Aboriginal person.

WHEN

DID THEY DROWN?

TIME OF YEAR

While water-related fatalities occur year-round in Canada, the largest number occur during the warmer months, especially in the summer. In the 2008 to 2012 period, the majority (66%) of drownings occurred in the May through September period, peaking in July and August (34%). This is consistent with data from the previous five-year period (2003–2007).

DAY OF WEEK

Over half (54%) of 2008–2012 drownings occurred on the weekend (Friday to Sunday). The proportion of weekend drownings was slightly higher in this most recent five-year period than in 2003–2007 (54% versus 50%). In 2008–2012, the frequency and proportion of weekday drownings decreased on all days except Thursday.

WHERE

DID THEY DROWN?

BODY OF WATER

Natural bodies of water such as lakes and ponds (39%); rivers, creeks and streams (27%); and oceans (10%) continued to account for the majority (76%) of Canadian drownings in 2008–2012. In the Maritime provinces, Newfoundland and Labrador, and the territories, this proportion was even greater: 86% to 100% of water-related fatalities occurred in natural

Note: Individual values are rounded and may not total 100%.

Drownings in man-made settings continued to be less frequent, but remain a concern especially for young children and older adults.

Bathtubs were the no. 1 man-made setting where drownings occurred in Canada (9%). Moreover, bathtub drownings have been on the

rise (+10% in 2008–2012 versus the previous five-year period). This increase can be partially attributed to a surge in bathtub drownings in Ontario (+48% over the previous five-year period).

Infants less than 1 year old are especially at risk for drowning in a bathtub: 75% of all drownings in this age group occurred in this setting. Young children and seniors are also vulnerable: 13% of drownings among 1- to 4-year-olds and 16% of drownings among those 65 and older occurred in a bathtub.

TPD1703038

Page 45 of 180

Appendix 4 for 3.3.: CLS Drowning Report

Consistent with previous years, pools accounted for 7% of all drownings in Canada in 2008–2012.

The majority of pool drownings occurred in private, backyard pools (84%), and this continued to be the no. 1 setting where children under the age of 5 most often drowned (41%).

Drownings in lifeguard supervised settings, such as public pools and waterfronts, continued to be rare—less than 2% of all water-related fatalities in 2008–2012 occurred in lifeguard supervised settings.

PROVINCES AND TERRITORIES

The highest drowning rates continued to be found in Canada’s territories. In 2008–2012, the average

URBAN VERSUS RURAL LOCATION

A disproportionately high number of people drowned in rural environments compared with the number who actually live there. Less than 20% of the Canadian population lives in a rural area, but just over 40% of all drownings occurred in rural environments. Almost half (48%) of the victims who drowned in a rural location were reported

as permanently residing in an urban area. The areas of Canada with the highest proportion of rural drownings were Saskatchewan (81%), Manitoba (74%) and the territories (71%).

Provinces and Territories

Average Number of Preventable Water-Related Deaths and Average Death Rates in Canada, 2003–2012

drowning rate in the three territories was 10.1 per 100,000 population per year. This is seven times higher than the water-related fatality rate for all of Canada. Encouragingly, there has been a reduction in this rate over time. In the most recent five-year period, the drowning rate in Northern Canada decreased by 29% (down from 14.2 per 100,000 in

2003–2007).

In 2008–2012, the average yearly water-related fatality rate was down 51% in the Northwest Territories (from 15.8 to 7.8 per 100,000) and down

25% in Nunavut (from 15.2 to 11.4 per 100,000).

After the territories, the next highest rates were found in Newfoundland and Labrador (4.2 per 100,000), Manitoba (2.3 per 100,000), Saskatchewan

(2.1 per 100,000) and British Columbia (1.8 per

100,000).

Drowning rates increased most in Saskatchewan (+40% in 2008–2012 compared with 2003–2007) and Manitoba (+28%). The largest decreases in drowning rates were in the territories, Prince Edward Island (–85%), Alberta (–25%) and New Brunswick (–24%).

Newfoundland and LabradorPrince Edward Island

Nova ScotiaNew Brunswick

Quebec OntarioManitoba Saskatchewan

Alberta   British Columbia Northwest  Territories

Nunavut Yukon

Note: The number of deaths is the average per year, and the death rate is the average per year, per 100,000 population.

TPD1703038

4                                                                                                                             CanadianDrowningRepPoargte–4260o1f51E8d0ition

Appendix 4 for 3.3.: CLS Drowning Report

WHAT

WERE THEY DOING?

PURPOSE OF ACTIVITY

Recreational activities continued to account for the majority of Canadian drownings (62%). In 2008–2012, 1,477 people drowned while involved in recreational activities in, on or near water, up slightly (+4%) compared with 2003–2007. Of these

Most Common Primary Recreational Activities

Average Number of Deaths per Year and Percentage of Preventable Water-Related Deaths in Canada, 2008–2012

Swimming

Walking/running/playing near water or on ice

76 (26%)

deaths, 381 occurred while people were “swimming,” which was the most common recreational activity immediately prior to drowning (26%). The next most common activity was “walking, running or playing near water or on ice,” which claimed

245 lives (17%).

Various activities of daily living accounted for the next highest proportion of drowning incidents in Canada (25%). In 2008–2012, 603

people were engaged in a “daily living” activity immediately prior to drowning, up slightly (+3%) compared with 2003–2007. The majority of these victims were either bathing (34%) or involved in a motor vehicle incident (33%).

Few Canadian drownings occurred during an occupational activity (5%); however, drownings associated with an occupational activity accounted for a large proportion of the water- related fatalities in Newfoundland and Labrador (29%) and Nova

Scotia (22%). The most common occupational activity engaged in prior to drowning was commercial fishing (38%).

In 147 cases (6%), the activity immediately prior to drowning was unknown, indicating that there were a number of people who were undertaking aquatic activities alone,

Page 47 of 180

Appendix 4 for 3.3.: CLS Drowning Report

TYPE OF ACTIVITY

Once again, the no. 1 type of activity engaged in prior to a water-related

Type of Activity

Average Number of Deaths per Year and Percentage of Preventable Water-Related Deaths in Canada, 2003–2012

fatality was “boating” (27%, consistent with the 2003–2007 percentage). In 2008–2012, 634 people drowned while boating in Canada—an average of 127 per year. The next most frequent type of activity was “aquatic,” meaning that the victim intended to be in the water at the time of the incident (25%).

Unintentional water entry during a non-aquatic activity accounted for the third greatest proportion of incidents (20%), and this activity type saw the

greatest increase (+13% compared with 2003–2007). Bathing deaths made up a smaller proportion of all water-related fatalities (9%).

Note: Individual values are rounded and may not total 100%.

Boating Incidents by Type of Vessel

Average Number of Deaths per Year and Percentage of Boating Deaths in Canada, 2003–2012

34 34

BOATING INCIDENTS

The number of boating fatalities in 2008–2012 remained consistent with what has been reported in the past. Over half (54%) of boating deaths occurred during powerboat use. Among these, small powerboats less than 5.5 metres in length (27%) were more commonly involved than large powerboats (13%) or personal watercraft (2%). After powerboats, canoes were the next most common type of vessel (21%). The distribution of type of watercraft used was consistent with that of 2003–2007.

For boating deaths for which personal flotation device (PFD) information was available, 81% of victims were not wearing a PFD/lifejacket at the time of the incident. Of the victims who were known to be not wearing a PFD/lifejacket (446), at least 152 (34%) had a lifejacket present in

the boat but were unable to put it on during the incident. Alcohol consumption was a factor in 40% of boating-related fatalities.

Note: Individual values are rounded and may not total 100%.

 6                                                                                                                             CanadianDrowningRepPoargte–4280o1f51E8d0ition

Appendix 4 for 3.3.: CLS Drowning Report

WHY

DID THEY DROWN? … RISK FACTORS

The major risk factors contributing to why water-related fatalities occurred in Canada remained consistent with those the Lifesaving Society has identified in the past. Alcohol has been a common factor associated with drowning; in about one in three drowning deaths in Canada, victims had consumed alcohol prior to the incident. The major risk factors associated with the common activities of boating and swimming, as well as with each age group—as identified from the 2008–2012 data—are outlined below.

BOATING

• Not wearing a PFD/lifejacket (81% of boating deaths for which PFD information was available)
• Cold water (53% of boating deaths for which water temperature information was available)
• Alcohol consumption (40%)
• Capsizing (38%)
• Boating alone (27%)
• Falling or being thrown overboard (26%)
• Rough water (20%)

SWIMMING

• Weak or non-swimmer (43% of swimming-related deaths for which swimming ability information was available)
• Alcohol consumption (31%)
• Swimming alone (25%)
• Heart disease/sudden cardiac event while swimming (19%)

IN SUMMARY

The latest data demonstrate that the downward trend in the drowning death rate in Canada has continued. However, there are still almost 500 water-related fatalities each year, and 2012 saw the most drownings since 2006.

The highest drowning rates occurred among men, young adults 20 to 34 years of age, and seniors 65 and older.

Drownings were most likely to occur during the summer, on weekends, and in natural bodies of water such as lakes and rivers. Fewer drownings occurred in private backyard pools, but this setting was especially hazardous for children under the age of 5.

The highest number of drownings occurred in the provinces with the most residents, such as British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec. But when population was taken into account, drowning rates were highest in the territories, Newfoundland and Labrador, Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

AGES O TO 4

• Alone near water (58%)
• Supervision absent (49%)
• Supervision present but distracted (43%)
• With other minors only (23%)

AGES 5 TO 14

• With other minors only (35%)

AGES 15 TO 19

• Not wearing a PFD when relevant (90% of deaths for which PFD information was available)
• Alcohol consumption (41%)
• Alone (27%)
• In, on or near water after dark (23%)

AGES 20 TO 34

• Not wearing a PFD when relevant (86% of deaths for which PFD information was available)
• Alcohol consumption (51%)
• Alone (29%)
• In, on or near water after dark (28%)

AGES 35 TO 64

• Not wearing a PFD when relevant (76% of deaths for which PFD information was available)
• Alone (49%)
• Alcohol consumption (42%)

AGES 65+

• Not wearing a PFD when relevant (80% of deaths for which PFD information was available)
• Alone (69%)
• Alcohol consumption (21%)

By purpose of activity, the largest proportion of incidents occurred during a recreational activity. The most common of these were “swimming” and “walking, running or playing near water or on ice.”

Boating was the most common type of activity prior to a water-related fatality. Not wearing a PFD/lifejacket and alcohol consumption were often contributing factors in boating incidents.

Long-term progress in the reduction of the Canadian drowning rate indicates that drowning prevention education may be working, but the increase in the number of drowning deaths in the most recent data collection year, 2012, reinforces the need to continue these efforts.

Page 49 of 180

Appendix 4 for 3.3.: CLS Drowning Report

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

COMPLETE DATA FROM 1995 TO 2012

The drowning research process involves data collection, research tabulation and analysis. The water-related death data are extracted from the Office of the Chief Coroner or Chief Medical Examiner in each province and territory. The scope of this research includes:

• collection of the data needed to profile victims of aquatic incidents, including the circumstances and contributing factors under which these incidents occurred;
• all deaths in each province/territory and in Canada overall resulting from incidents “in, on or near” water—“near-water” incidents were included if the incident was closely related to water-based recreational, occupational or daily living activity, or if the presence of water appeared to be an attraction contributing to the incident;
• only preventable (unintentional) deaths, not deaths due to natural causes, suicide or homicide.

PRELIMINARY INTERIM DATA

Complete final data on drownings and other water-related deaths that occurred after 2012 are not yet available from the offices of the provincial/territorial Chief Coroners and Chief Medical Examiners. The interim, preliminary data are derived from media releases, media clippings, news reports and Internet searches.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We gratefully acknowledge the support, co-operation and efforts of:

• The Office of the Chief Coroner or Chief Medical Examiner in each province/territory, which permitted and facilitated confidential access to reports on preventable water-related deaths. This provided the base data for this research and report.
• The volunteers who contributed their time and energy to the research, including data extraction on preventable water-related deaths from coroners’/medical examiners’ files.
• Tessa Clemens, who was the primary author and data analyst for this report, and Lucie Simoes, who provided data input and verification.

LIFESAVING SOCIETY

The Lifesaving Society—Canada’s lifeguarding experts—works to prevent drowning and water-related injury through its training programs, Water Smart® public education, aquatic safety management, drowning research and lifesaving sport. Annually, over one million Canadians participate

in the Society’s swimming, lifesaving, lifeguard, first aid and leadership training programs. The Society sets the standard for aquatic safety in Canada and certifies Canada’s national lifeguards.

8

CONTACT US

National Office

Tel: 613-746-5694

Email: experts@lifesaving.ca www.lifesaving.ca

BC and Yukon

Tel: 604-299-5450

Email: info@lifesaving.bc.ca www.lifesaving.bc.ca

Alberta and Northwest Territories Tel: 780-415-1755

Email: experts@lifesaving.org www.lifesaving.org

Saskatchewan

Tel: 306-780-9255

Email: lifesaving@sasktel.net www.lifesavingsociety.sk.ca

Manitoba

Tel: 204-956-2124

Email: aquatics@lifesaving.mb.ca www.lifesaving.mb.ca

Ontario

Tel: 416-490-8844

Email: experts@lifeguarding.com www.lifesavingsociety.com

Quebec

Tel: 514-252-3100

Email: alerte@sauvetage.qc.ca www.sauvetage.qc.ca

New Brunswick

Tel: 506-455-5762

Email: info@lifesavingnb.ca www.lifesavingnb.ca

Nova Scotia

Tel: 902-425-5450

Email: experts@lifesavingsociety.ns.ca www.lifesavingsociety.ns.ca

Prince Edward Island

Tel: 902-368-7757

Email: info@lifesavingsocietypei.ca www.lifesavingsocietypei.ca

Newfoundland and Labrador

Tel: 709-576-1953

Email: lifeguard@bellaliant.com www.lifesavingnl.ca

Drowning Prevention Research Centre Canada

The Drowning Prevention Research Centre is the lead agency for drowning and water-incident research

in Canada. The Centre conducts research into fatal and non-fatal drownings, significant aquatic injury and rescue interventions. Contact Barbara Byers, Research Director, at experts@drowningresearch.ca or 416-490-8844.

CanadianDrowningRepPoargte–5200o1f51E8d0ition

3.4.  11:00 a.m. 2018 Alberta Summer Games Update

#20170216003

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Scheduled Time : 11:00

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

2018 Alberta Summer Games Chairman Lionel Robins, and Games Manager Lindsey McNeil to present an update.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

For information

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

For information

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs

3.5.  11:15 a.m. Bezanson Volunteer Fire Department

#20170306019

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Scheduled Time : 11:15

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

Members of the Bezanson Volunteer Fire Department will be in to speak to their event and the financial position of the Society.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

The County has budgeted $5,000 for this event each year.

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

1 – Direct administration to release the $5,000 2 – Approve sponsorship in a lesser amount

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs.

12^thAnnual Firemen’s Ball

Bezanson Volunteer Fire Department Society April 8,  2017

Bezanson Volunteer Fire Department Society presents you with an opportunity to support the 12th Annual Firemen’s Ball on April 8th, 2017. You too can help us make a difference in our community and surrounding areas!

Bezanson Station #9 consists of fully trained firefighters and Medical Co-Responders (MCRs), many trained in both disciplines. All are ready to serve their community when emergencies happen. We are proud of the people that donate their time and energy to respond to emergencies, and active ly take part in community initiatives throughout the year. Bezanson Volunteer Fire Department Society is in place to fundraise for initiatives that the operational side and the non-profit society deem as priorities in our department and community.

As in the past, proceeds from this Firemen’s Ball will go towards worthwhile community projects like the outdoor rink and proposed community centre, as well as equipment and programs needed at the firehall.

Our Society has set a high standard of excellence at this annual event. Each year we host a sell­ out crowd of approximately 250 people, which is great exposure for your business! The evening consists of a hearty dinner, silent and live auctions, prizes, raffles, followed by a dance to live music!

We encourage you to become a part of the success. The attached page outlines the different sponsorship levels that will make the 12^th Annual Firemen’s Ball a great fundraiser for our community. Your donation will go towards making the event a smashing success, however we’d also be happy to hear suggestions you have to make the event even better.

Thank-you for considering this opportunity. Should you have any questions please feel free to contact me at (780) 897-7060, or email me at : wade.doris@ipaper.com

Sincerel y,

Wade Dons President

Bezanson Volunteer Fire Department Society

GOLD

Sponsor

$2,500    •   4 Complimentary tickets to the event, Recognition on a

PowerPoint slide show that will play throughout the event, Verbal mention throughout the program, Recognition on Facebook & in the Dail Herald Tribune

BRONZE

Sponsor

$500      •   Recognition on a PowerPoint slide show that will play throughout the event, Recognition on Facebook & in the Dail Herald Tribune

ENTERTAINMENT      $1,000    •   2 Complimentary tickets to the event, Recognition on a Sponsor                    PowerPoint slide show that will play throughout the

event, Verbal mention throughout the program, Recognition on Facebook & in the Daily Herald Tribune

COMMUNITY HERO

Less     •   Recognition on PowerPoint slide show that will play

than           throughout the event, Recognition on Facebook & in the

$SOO          Daily Herald Tribune

3.6.  11:30 a.m. Big Brothers Big Sisters

#20170217001

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Scheduled Time : 11:30

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

Amy Mohr from Big Brothers, Big Sisters will be in to thank you Council for the support for their 9th annual Ultimate Escape event.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

Council sponsored the event for $2,500 in 2016 and 2015.

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

For information.

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

For information.

3.7.  1:00 p.m. Crosslink County Sportsplex Update

#20170306010

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Scheduled Time : 13:00

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

General Manager Ramona Rollins to present an update as per the attached report.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

For information

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

For information

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs

UNK

SPORTSPt.EX

Nustadia Recreation Inc. – Cross/ink County Sportsplex

2016 Annual Operations Council Report – Recreation Advisory Meeting March 16, 2017

1. 1.    FACILITY UTILIZATION FOR PREVIOUS MONTHS

January

Fieldhouse: 144 prime time hours out of 259 possible prime time hours were booked for 56% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is a 1% increase compared to January 2015 .

63 hours out of 170 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 37% usage. This is an increase of 2% compared to January 2015. This includes Tender Tots.

*Grande Prairie Soccer Association booked a total of 36 hours in the Fieldhouse in January – this is 15 hours less than January 2015.

Arenas:            Ice Rinks – 417 hours out of 518 possible prime time hours were booked for 81% usage. This is a 1% increase compared to January 2015.

76 hours out of 340 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 22% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is an increase of 5% compared to January 2015. Booked hours include Learn to Skate.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse:  76 prime time field hours out of remaining 115 were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 66% usage during the remaining non-bookedhours that were left available for renters. 59 non-prime time field hours out of remaining 119 hours were booked for drop-ins (not including Tender Tots) for a minimum of 50% usage during the remaining non­ booked hours that were left available for renters.

Drop-In Programs – Ice Rink: 54 prime time ice hours out of remaining 105 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 51% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 94 non-prime time arena hours out of remaining 264 non-booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 36% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters .

Birthday Parties:      41 parties booked in January Bouncy Castles:                   24 castle rentals in January

KnockerBalls :         8 KnockerBall Rentals in January (48 small, 9 large)

February

UNK

SPOQTSP.EX

Fieldhouse: 133 prime time hours out of 242 possible prime time hours were booked for 55% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is a decrease of 8% compared to February 2015 due to Northern Lights Baseball Academy’s coaching issues.

68 hours out of 176 possible non-prime time hours were booked (not including drop-in programs except Tender Tots) for 37% usage. This is an increase of 6% compared to February 2015.

Arenas:            Ice Rinks – 398 hours out of 484 possible prime time hours were booked for 83% usage . This is a 1% increase compared to February 2015.

47 hours out of 352 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 13% usage. This is an increase of 6% compared to February 2015. This includes Learn to Skate.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse: 80 prime time field hours out of remaining 109 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 73% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 90 non-prime time field hours out of remaining 108 hours were booked for drop-ins (not including Tender Tots) for a minimum of 83% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

*Grande Prairie Soccer Association booked a total of 46 hours in the Fieldhouse in February – this is an increase of 1 hour compared to February 2015.

Drop-In Programs – Ice Rink(s): 56 prime time ice hours out of remaining 89 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 63% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 173 non-prime time arena hours out of remaining 305 non­ booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 57% usage during the remaining non­ booked hours that were left available for renters.

Birthday Parties: 25 parties booked in February

Year-End Sport Party: 1 season-ending party booked in February Bouncy Castles: 19 castle rentals in February

KnockerBal ls: 3 KnockerBall Rentals in February (17 small, 7 large)

March

Fieldhouse: 173 prime time hours out of 254 possible prime time hours were booked for 78% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is an increase of 9% compared to March 2015.

109 hours out of 195 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 56% usage (not including drop-in programs except Tender Tots). This is an increase of 11% compared to March 2015.

Arenas:          346 hours out of 508 possible prime time hours were booked for 68% usage. This is a decrease of 4% compared to March 2015, which is due to teams being knocked out

of playoffs early in the month.

73 hours out of 390 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 19% usage. This includes Learn To Skate. This is an increase of 9% compared to March 2015.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse: 70 prime time field hours out of remaining 81 were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 86% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 80 non-prime time field hours out of remaining 86 hours were booked for drop-ins (not including Tender Tots) for a minimum of 93% usage during the rema ining non­ booked hours that were left available for renters.

*Grande Prairie Soccer Association booked a total of 34 Fieldhouse hours in March. This is 34 hours more than March 2015.

Drop-In Programs – Ice Rinks: 87 prime time ice rink hours out of remaining 162 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 54% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 189 non-prime time hours out of remaining 317 non-booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 60% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

Birthday Parties: 33 parties were booked in March

Year-End Sport Party: 7 season-ending parties booked in March Bouncy Castles: 28 castle rentals in March

KnockerBalls:      13 rentals in March (88 small, 40 large)

LJNK

SPQRTSPU)(

April

Fieldhouse: 212 prime time hours out of 256 possible prime time hours were booked for 83% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is an increase of 19% compared to April 2015.

61 hours out of 178 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 34% usage. This includes Tender Tots.

*Grande Prairie Soccer Association booked a total of 46 hours in the Fieldhouse in April – this is 23 hours more than April 2015.

Arenas:            Ice Rink – 205 hours out of 256 possible prime time hours were booked for 80% usage. This is an increase of 26% compared to April 2015.

22 hours out of 178 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 12% usage (not including drop-in programs). This includes ·Learn to Skate programs.

Dry Floor – 85 hours out of 197 possible prime time hours were booked for 43%

usage. This is a decrease of 21% compared to April 2015, which is due to the new ball hockey league’s first season. Also, the floor was not in use for one week while the ice was removed and the floor was painted. The new ball hockey league did not start playing until the end of April, so lacrosse was the only user for the first two weeks of avai lable floor time.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse: 32 prime time field hours out of remaining 44 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 73% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 72 non-prime time field hours out of remaining 117 hours were

_booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 62% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left avai lable for renters.

Drop-In Programs – Ice Rink: 30 prime time ice hours out of remaining 51 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 59% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 112 non-prime time arena hours out of remaining 156 non-booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 72% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

Drop-In Programs – Dry Floor: 42 prime time dry floor hours out of 112 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 38% usage during the remaining non-bookedhours that were left available for renters. 72 non-prime time arena hours out of 178 non-booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 40% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that

Birthday Parties: Bouncy Castles: KnockerBalls:

25 parties booked in April 12 castle rentals in April

40 KnockerBall Rentals in April (26 small, 14 large)

Season-End Parties: 2

School Visits:               9

Fieldhouse: 40 prime time hours out of 248 possible prime time hours were booked for 16% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is a decrease of 18% compared to May 2015, which is due to exceptionally good weather (user groups moved outdoors much earlier than usual).

86 hours out of 187 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 46% usage. This is an increase of 10% compared to May 2015. This includes Tender Tots.

Arenas:

Ice Rink – 151 hours out of 248 possible prime time hours were booked for 61% usage. This is an increase of 1% compared to May 2014.

6 hours out of 187 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 3% usage. Learn To Skate hours are normally included in this, but the sessions ended in April.

Dry Floor – 125 hours out of 248 possible prime time hours were booked for 50% usage. This is a decrease of 8% compared to May 2015 and is due to lower registration numbers because of both the economy and the new ball hockey league.

Outdoor:

Sr. Baseball Diamond – The baseball diamond will not be operative until 2017.

Adult Soccer Field – 6 hours out of 248 possible prime time hours were booked for 2% usage. This is an increase of 2% compared to May 2015. There were cancellations due to inclement weather.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse: 153 prime time field hours out of remaining 208 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 74% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 58 non-prime time field hours out of remaining 101 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 57% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that

*Grande Prairie Soccer Association booked a total of 0 hours in the Fieldhouse in May compared to 4 hours in 2015, 0 hours in 2014 and 15 hours in May 2013. They did book 6 hours on the outdoor adult field in May.

Drop-In Programs – Ice Rink(s): 57 prime time ice hours out of remaining 97 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 59% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 150 non-prime time arena hours out of remaining 181 non­ booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 83% usage during the remaining non­ booked hours that were left available for renters.

Drop-In Programs – Dry Floor: 43 prime time dry floor hours out of remaining 123 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 35% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 112 non-prime time arena hours out of 171 non-booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 65% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

Birthday Parties: 19 parties booked in May Bouncy Castles: 15 castle rentals in May

KnockerBalls:         26 KnockerBall Rentals in May (14 small, 12 large)

June

Fieldhouse: 57 prime time hours out of 248 possible prime time hours were booked for 23% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is an increase of 5% compared to June 2015.

105 hours out of 187 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 56% usage. This includes Tender Tots. This is equal to June 2015.

Arenas:            Ice Rink – 112 hours out of 248 possible prime time hours were booked for 45% usage. This is a decrease of 11% compared to June 2015, but this was expected, as the Sportsplex was the only facility with ice in the region in June 2015.

60 hours out of 187 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 34% usage. This is an increase of 31% compared to June 2015.

Dry Floor – 140 hours out of 242 possible prime time hours were booked for 58% usage. This is an increase of 1% compared to June 2015.

Besides drop-ins, no non-prime time hours were booked.

Outdoor:       Sr. Baseball Diamond – The baseball diamond will not be operative until 2017.

Adult Soccer Field – 24 hours out of 248 possible prime time hours were booked for 10% usage. This is an increase of 10% compared to June 20 15.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse: 160 prime time field hours out of remaining 191 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 84% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 69 non-prime time field hours out of remaining 82 hours were booked for drop-ins (not including Tender Tots) for a minimum of 84% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

*Grande Prairie Soccer Association booked a total of 4 Fieldhouse hours in June. This is 4 hours more than 2015.

Drop–In Programs – Ice Rinks 78 prime time ice rink hours out of remaining 136 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 57% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 100 non-prime time hours out of remaining 127 non-booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 79% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

Birthday Parties: 25 parties were booked in June. Bouncy Castles: 23 castle rentals in June.

KnockerBalls:        18 KnockerBall Rentals in June (14 small, 4 large)

UNK

TY SPCR-isP.E.X

Fieldhouse: 23 prime time hours out of 265 possible prime time hours were booked for 9% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is 1% less (4 hours) than 2015, which is expected to fluctuate annually during the outdoor season .

184 hours out of 184 possible non–prime time hours were booked for 100% usage. This is equivalent to July 2015. This includes Tender Tots and Summer Camps.

*Grande Prairie Soccer Association booked a total of 0 hours in the Fieldhouse in July – this is equal to the hours booked in July 2014 and July 2015. GPSA booked 66 hours on the outdoor fields in 2014 but did not book any sessions in 2015; however, they booked Monday and Wednesday nights on the outdoor fields in 2016 for a total of 56 hours.

*The outdoor fields were booked for 26 hours in July, which is a 27% increase compared to 2015.

Arenas:            Ice Rink – 78 hours out of 265 possible prime time hours were booked for 41% usage. This is an increase of 8% compared to July 2015.

22 hours out of 142 possible non–prime time hours were booked for 15% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is an increase of 2% compared to July 2015. Learn to Skate programs did not run in July.

Dry Floor – 56 hours out of 142 possible prime time hours were booked for 39% usage . This is a decrease of 7% compared to July 2015 due to lacrosse provincials being held in the facility in July 2015 and also because ball hockey concluded their season earlier this year. The floor was not in use for one week during ice installation.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse: 177 prime time field hours out of remain ing 242 were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 73% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. All non-prime time field hours were booked due to summer camps.

Drop-In Programs – Ice Rink: 117 prime time ice hours out of remaining 187 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 63% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters . 100 non-prime time arena hours out of remaining 120 non­ booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 83% usage during the remaining non­ booked hours that were left available for renters.

CR. , s S l..l N K

C C-              SPORTSPl.EX

Drop-In Programs – Dry Floor: 59 prime time dry floor hours out of 86 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 69% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 85 non-prime time arena hours out of 142 non-booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 60% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

Birthday Parties:      11 parties booked in July Bouncy Castles:      11 castle rentals in July

KnockerBalls:          2 KnockerBall Rentals in July (3 small, 1 large)

August

Fieldhouse: 22 prime time hours out of 248 possible prime time hours were booked for 9% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is a decrease of 2% (4 hours) compared to August 2014 and is due to the hockey camps conducting dryland training outside instead this year.

200 hours out of 200 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 100% usage. This is equivalen t to August 2014. This includes Tender Tots and Summer Camps.

Arenas :           Ice Rinks – 142 hours out of 496 possible prime time hours were booked for 29% usage. This is equivalent to Augus t 2014.

75 hours out of 400 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 19% usage.

This is a decrease of 25% compared to August 2015 due to last minute hockey camp cancellation (because of lack of registrations). Learn to Skate programs did not run during Augus t.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse: 177 prime time field hours out of remaining 226 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 78% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. All non-prime time field hours were booked due to summer camps.

*Grande Prairie Soccer Association booked a total of 3 hours in the Fieldhouse in August – this is three hours more than they booked in August 2015. GPSA booked 16 hours on the outdoor fields in 2014 but did not book any sessions in 2015.

Drop-In Programs – Ice Rink(s): 211 prime time ice hours out of remaining 354 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 60% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 204 non-prime time arena hours out of remaining 325 non­ booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 63% usage during the remaining non­ booked hours that were left available for renters.

Birthday Parties: 19 parties booked in Augus t – CoolAid Society also booked 1 private party. Bouncy Castles: 17 castle rentals in August

KnockerBalls:       2 KnockerBall Rentals in August (12 small, 7 large)

September

Fieldhouse: 41 prime time hours out of 242 possible prime time hours were booked for 17% usage (not including drop-in programs). T h is is equivalent to September 2015.

89 hours out of 184 possible non -prime time hours were booked for 47% usage. This includes Tender Tots. This is an increase of 1% compared to September 2015.

Are nas:            248 hours out of 448 possible prime time hours were booked for 59%

usage. This is a decrease of 4% compared to September 2014, which is believed to be due to both the commencement of school and the Labor Day Statutory holiday’s placement during the beginning of the month. Minor Hockey started later this year than in 2015.

10 hours out of 368 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 3% usage. This includes Learn To Skate. This 1% less than September 2015, which is due to Learn To Skate not starting until October 3rd this year.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse: 150 prime time field hours out of remaining 201 were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 75% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 60 non-prime time field hours out of rema ining 95 hours were booked for drop-ins (not including Tender Tots) for a minimum of 63% usage during the remaining non­ booked hours that were left available for renters.

*Grande Prairie Soccer Association booked a total of O Fieldhouse hours in September. This is equivalent to 2015.

Drop-In Programs – Ice Rinks: 153 prime time ice rink hours out of remaining 200 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 77% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 190 non-prime time hours out of remaining 358 non-booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 53% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

Birthday Parties: 17 parties were booked in September – 1 school also booked a private session Bouncy Cas tles: 16 castle rentals in September

KnockerBa lls:      5 rentals in September (18 small, 24 large)

October

Fieldhouse: 135 prime time hours out of 259 possible prime time hours were booked for 52% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is an increase of 16% compared to October 2015.

81 hours out of 184 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 44% usage.

This is a decrease of 3% compared (6 hours) to Octobe r 2016 due to available program hours for Tender Tots. This includes TenderTots.

* Grande Prairie Soccer Assoc iation booked a total of 3 hours in the Fieldhouse in October – this is 5 hours less than October 2015; however , the Grande Prairie Regional College Wolves booked 36.5 hours for soccer.

Arenas :           Ice Rinks – 397 hours out of 518 possible prime time hours were booked for 77% usage. This is equal to October 2015.

84 hours out of 368 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 23% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is an increase of 1% compared to October 2015. Booked hours include Learn to Skate.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse: 71 prime time field hours out of remaining 124 were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 57% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

TSP U: X

Drop-In Programs – Ice Rink(s): 83 prime time ice hours out of remaining 121 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 69% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 142 non-prime time arena hours out of remaining 284 non­ booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 50% usage during the remaining non­ booked hours that were left available for renters.

Birthday Parties:      39 parties booked in October Bouncy Castles:                   25 castle rentals in October

KnockerBalls:          8 KnockerBall Rentals in October (39 small, 26 large)

November

Fieldhouse: 156 prime time hours out of 242 possible prime time hours were booked for 64% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is an increase of 20% compared to November 2015.

91 hours out of 192 possible non–prime time hours were booked for 48% usage. This is equivalent to November 2015. This includes Tender Tots.

Are nas:            Ice Rinks – 414 hours out of 484 possible prime time hours were booked for 86% usage. This is an increase of 4% compared to November 2015.

60 hours out of 384 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 16% usage.

This is an increase of 3% compared to November 2015. This includes Learn to Skate.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse: 45 prime time field hours out of remain ing 86 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 52% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

*Grande Prairie Soccer Association booked a total of 6 hours in the Fieldhouse in November – this is a decrease of 28 hours compared to November 2015; however the Grande Prairie Regional College Wolves booked 32 hours for soccer.

Drop-In Programs – Ice Rink(s): 17 prime time ice hours out of remaining 70 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 24% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters (only late night hours were available). 160 non-prime time arena hours out of remaining 324 non-booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 46% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

Birthday Parties: 28 parties booked in November Bouncy Castles: 23 castle rentals in November

KnockerBalls: 5 KnockerBall Rentals in November (20 small, 17 large) Christmas Parties: 6 parties booked in November

December

Fieldhouse: 90 prime time hours out of 221 possible prime time hours were booked for 41% usage (not including drop-in programs). This is equivalent to December 2015.

85 hours out of 162 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 52% usage. This is an increase of 16% compared to December 2015. This includes Tender Tots.

Arenas:            335 hours out of 442 possible prime time hours were booked for 76%

usage. This is a decrease of 3% compared to December 2015, which is mostly due to the statutory holidays.

81 hours out of 324 possible non-prime time hours were booked for 25% usage. This is an increase of 12% compared to December 2015. This includes Learn To Skate, which ran later into December 2016 than in 2015.

Drop-In Programs – Fieldhouse: 89 prime time field hours out of remaining 130 were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 68% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 65 non-prime time field hours out of remaining 77 hours were booked for drop-ins (not including Tender Tots) for a minimum of 84% usage during the remaining non­ booked hours that were left available for renters.

TSP.EX

*Grande Prairie Soccer Association booked a total of 3 Fieldhouse hours in December. This is 20 hours less than December 2015; however, the Grande Prairie Regional College Wolves booked 19 hours for soccer.

Drop-In Programs – Ice Rinks: 79 prime time ice rink hours out of remaining 107 hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 74% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters. 153 non-prime time hours out of remaining 243 non-booked hours were booked for drop-ins for a minimum of 63% usage during the remaining non-booked hours that were left available for renters.

Birthday Parties: 37 parties booked in December Bouncy Castles: 38 castle rentals in December

KnockerBalls:       5 rentals in December (22 small, 30 large) Christmas Parties: 7 parties booked in December

1. 2.    NET REVENUE – Fall/Winter    (Other 2016 Seasons Previously Reported Quarterly)

1. 3.    ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE – Fall/Winter October:                        ($80,749)

November:     ($56,341)

December:      ($82,599)

1. 4.    INSURANCE CLAIMS – Fall/Winter

No claims to date.

1. 5.    STAFFING – Fall/Winter

New hires

Don Griffith, Joel Wamsteeker, Manoj Dodangodage , Rusheen Aghdasy and Ryan Courtoreille were hired in Operations through this quarter, which resulted in higher wages than expected being paid out in December due to staff training and maintenance projects. Jeanne Lomenda was also hired in Guest Services, and Robin Rochon has been hired as a certified fitness instructor whose classes will commence in January 2017.

Departures

There were not any resignations this quarter.

Training

The staff that are new have received training on their speci fic job duties, and the new staff has until January 3P ¹ to complete the five required online training modules. Training is still ongoing with the new Operations staff. A first-aid course is scheduled in January 2017.

1. 6.    USER GROUPS/LEAGUE/PROGRAM ACTIVITIES

1. a.    Fall/Winter Arenas – In October, the season again got into full swing for our leagues, and Learn to Skate sessions also began in October. In early October, the NCHL started their season with 17 teams registered. The organizers came to the Sportsplex again this year for a Meet and Greet in the Players’ Bench so that the teams are familiar with them and are comfortable in reaching out to them. One team was banned from the league after only a few games due to rough-housing, as well as swearing at and making rude comments to the referees and players. In October, the Sportsplex also hosted the Grande Prairie Petroleum Association’s 10^th Annua l Jeff Toewes Memorial Tournament, which was a great success and resulted in the group booking their tournament at the Sportsplex for 2017 as well, which will be their fourth tournament in the facility. Grande Prairie Minor Hockey cancelled two tournaments this quarter due to a lack of team registratio ns. In December, we hosted our 3^rd Annual Santa Skate in partnership with the Community Foundation of the County of Grande Prairie Firefighters, which successfully raised $250 and several large boxes of non-perishable food items that were donated to the Sexsmith and Area Christmas Hamper Program. The next Santa Play & Skate is scheduled for Sunday, December 10, 2017. We are looking forward to several tournaments early in the new year including an Initiation Mega Tournament in January organized by Clairmont Minor Hockey.

CR.      S’ U N K

CC’               SPO  R TSP   _EX

1. b.    Fall/Winter Fieldhouse – Our birthday party program and bouncy castles are still thriving, and we are still running Tender Tots every weekday morning. Our US and U8 Soccer Leagues finished their season on November 19¹h, and our next session begins in April 2017. We had 72 children participate in our fall soccer leagues, which is five less than last year (we were expecting a slight decrease due to the economy). Yoga classes also continued, and more class

options will again be available in 2017. We have a confirmed fitness instructor who will be offering a $45 minute class during the Thursday Seniors’ Walk and Talk (we will be charging a

$2 introductory instructor fee per participant), and she will also be instructing FitMom Bootcamps twice per week. Over the last quarter, the KnockerBall (soccer bubble) rentals in the fieldhouse were booked for 18 events, and the batting cage was booked for 24 events. A shipment of new KnockerBalls arrived in November and was paid for through the Operations Budget. In 2016, we booked a new indoor softball league in the fieldhouse, which commenced in January 2016 and ran on Tuesday nights; next year, the league has booked Tuesday and Thursday nights beginning in January 2017. The league runs until the second week of April 2017 when they end their season with an indoor tournament at the Sportsplex.

1. 7.    FACILITY – Fall/Winter

1. a.    The renovation of the rugby fields into a senior baseball diamond is still only “mostly” complete because of poor soil, lack of drainage and the dugout rooftops blowing off. New soil was added to the field and a trenching system was put into place. The rooftops will hopefully be replaced early in 2017. The Grande Prairie Sic-Pitch League requested that sic-pitch diamonds be constructed at the Sportsplex, and offered a significant monetary investment. Two of the adult soccer pitches at the south of the facility are currently under renovation into diamonds to accommodate this league. We hope that the diamonds will be ready for use in 2017 but it will depend on the renovation time and whether or not the grass is able to take root in time.

1. b.    The yearly fire extinguisher and sprinkler system inspection is scheduled to take place in February 2017.

1. c.    The annual insurance review of the Sportsplex was held on December 21^st and went very well.

1. d.    All three of the Mycom compressors in the refrigeration plant have had full inspections completed this quarter, and they all had oil changes in December.

1. 8.    TENANTS/ADVERTISING – Fall/Winter

1. a.     Fitness Area – Motion Fitness currently has 265 members, which is up from 199 at the end of September. The gym manager feels that this increase is influenced by the installation of their new tanning booth.

CR        :._S U N K

C             TY SPOQT

1. b.    Sport Retail – Ernie’s Sports Experts is open daily for the fall and winter hockey season. The lease for the Ernie’s retail store recently expired, so the business that they have gained at the Sportsplex is under review before the final decision will be made as to whether or not to continue on with the lease. It has also been requested by Nustadia that they review their business hours if the lease is to continue.

1. c.     Concession – As decided by the Facility Management Review Team, Tito’s and the Players’ Bench will possibly not have their lease amounts increased in December. The FMRT has requested that both of the food operators submit their Financial Statements for review before granting their requests. This final decision will be made at the beginning of January.

1. d.    Lounge – PC World Ent is currently in default of payment according to their lease agreement with Addendums added, which is under review by the FMRT. Four letters of default have been submitted to PC World Ent at this time. Please see above regarding further lease issues.

1. e.    Promotional Opportunities – We continue with radio, online, newspaper, community and facility publications, and our virtual tour has been quite successful with 36,069 hits in 2016. Two directional billboards are still in place from the east and west of Grande Prairie. CIA Solutions will be displaying large digital ads beginning in mid-December and continuing into 2017. In February, we are hosting our 5^th Annual half-price two-for-one Valentine Skate as well as half price Family Day, and we will have booths in three upcoming trade shows in 2017. A survey was held this quarter with the chance to win a prize basket for participating, and we had very positive feedback . It was hoped that 150 people would fill out the survey, but we had over 350 responses. A “people counter” was installed on December 7, 2016, and the numbers are certain to influence retaining current sponsors as well as gaining new ones.

1. 9.    FMRT- Fall/Winter

The next FMRT meeting is March 14, 2017 .

1. a.    The Facility Management Review Team has made the decision to retain the current Trican Fieldhouse rental rates as well as almost all admission prices until January 2018 in light of the economy. Only the ice rates will increase slightly as well as the admission rates for Shinny and Stick & Puck programs.

10. HR – Fall/Winter

1. a.    Policy – Occupational Health and Safety. We recently had a surprise visit from an Occupational Health and Safety Officer with Work Safe Alberta, and his report was very positive with no faults found.

CROSSLINK COUNTY SPORTSPLEX TRAFFIC

A people counter from SMS Traffic Solutions was installed above the Sportsplex’s front entrance doors early in December and became fully operational on December 7, 2016 at 11:00 a.m. From that time until December 31, 2016, the camera counted the following numbers (*Note – the facility closed at 5:00 p.m. on December 24^th and 31^st and was closed on December 25^th and 26^th) :

Total Patrons: 14,888     *Average of 596 patrons/day Children (Dec 10 to Dec 31): 6,107                       *Measured by height Approximate Spectators: 4,446

CR       SS     INK

1. 11.               ANNUAL NET REVENUE – 2016

Budget              Variance

2016 Total Revenue:  $1,109,670              Budget: $1,151,006              Variance: ($41,336)

1. 12.               ANNUAL ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE – 2016

HYDRO

January 2014: 208,050.12 kWh @ $0.04.5492 = $9,464.60 + Other Costs+ GST = $22,267.48

January 2015: 236,509.01 kWh @ $0.05. 7070 = $13,497.57 + Other Costs+ GST = $26,402.90 January 2016:  245,348.70 kWh @ $0.05.6790 = $13,933.35 + Other Costs+ GST = $25,795.18

February 2014: 209,082.27 kWh @ $0.05.7070 = $11,932.28 + Other Costs + GST = $22,429.31 February 2015: 221,176.48 kWh @ $0.05.7070 = $12,622.54 + Other Costs+ GST = $24,699.00 February 2016:  233,146.48 kWh @$0.05.6790 = $13,240.99  + Other Costs  + GST = $25,205.73

March 2014: 204,400.20 kWh @0.05.7070 = $10,853.56 + Other Costs+ GST = $25,021.62 March 2015: 259,486.98 kWh@ 0.05.1956 = $13,481.95 + Other Costs+ GST = $ 25,671.09

March 2016: 237,565.28 kWh@ $0.05.6790 = $13,491.33 + Other Costs+ GST = $24,318.28

April 2013 : 1 30,347.86 kWh@ $0.14.0576 = $18,328.80 + Other Costs+ GST = $23,260.25

April 2014: 181,734.56 kWh @$0.05.4655 = $9,932.71 + Other Costs+ GST = $20,703.73

April  2015:   178,650.42 kWh@ $0.05.2551 = $9,388.18 + Other  Costs+ GST = $20,706.70

April 2016: 193,067.25 kWh @$0.05.6790 = $10,964.29 + Other Costs+ GST = $22,485.55

May 2013: 135,755.75 kWh @$0.13.0947 = $17,776.78 + Other Costs+ GST = $28,902.92

May 2014: 159,575.62 kWh @ $0.05.7070 + $117.28 Variable= $9,224,26 + Other Costs+ GST = $23,409.45

May 2015:  208,208.41 kWh @ $0.06.5227 = $13,580 .89 + Other Co sts + GST = $23,351 .61

May 2016:   188,568.92 kWh @ $0.05.6790 = $10,708.83  + Othe r Costs+ GST = $21,776.34

June 2013: 117,670.52 kWh @ $0.11.1088 = $13,071.03 + Other Costs + GST = $22,575.98

June 2014:   158,548.13 kWh  @$0.05.7070  = $9,048.34 + Other Costs+ GST = $19,182.45

June 2015:  214,507.96 kWh@ $0.07.8764 = $16,895.58  + Other Costs +GST = $27,439.29

June 2016:  197,507.29 kWh @ $0.05.6790 = $11,216.44 + Other Costs + GST = $22,412.45

July 2013: 138,850.92 kWh@ $0.06.0336 = $8,377.68 + Other Costs+ GST = $15,531.00

July 2014: 164,999.99 kWh @ $0.05.7070 + $4,294.50 Variable = $13,711 .05 + Other Costs + GST = $22,964.60

July 2015: 231,148.86 kWh@ 0.04.7786 = $11,045 .77 + Other Costs+ GST = $21,210 .03

July 2016: 219,660.90 kWh@ $0.05.6790 = $12,474.54 + Other Costs+ GST = $23,559.77

August 2013: 191,025.17 kWh @$0.08.6586 = $16,540.20 + Other Costs+ GST = $28,607.61

August 2014: 220,701.05 kWh@ $0.05.7094 = $12,600.66 + Other Costs+ GST = $28,948.69 August 2015: 266,811.71 kWh @$0.05.7070 = $1 4,849.86 + Other Costs+ GST = $25,759.50 August 2016: 25,353.15 kWh @$0.05.6790 = $14,690.87 + Other Costs+ GST = $26,620.81

Sept  2013:   219,997.92 kWh@ $0.11.9675 = $26,328.23 + Other Costs+ GST = $39,466.63

Sept 2014: 237,940.88 kWh@ $0.05.6855 = $13,528.01 + Othe r Costs+ GST = $27.415.16 Sept 2015: 222,117.15 k Wh @ $0.05.7070 = $12,630.11 + Other Costs+ GST = $23,887.74 Sept 2016: 221,831.38 kWh @ $0.05 .6790 = $12,597.80 + Other Costs + GST = $24,884.11

Oct 2013: 227,339.92 kWh @$0.06.6433 = $18,328.80 + Other Costs+ GST = $28,971.36 Oct 2014: 229,739.61 kWh @$0.05.070 = $13,111.24 + Other Costs+ GST = $25,434.91 Oct 2015: 245,852.87 kWh@ $0.05.5358 = $13,609.90 + Other Costs+ GST = $24,255.89 Oct  2016:  228,909.59 kWh@ $0.05.6790 = $12,999.78 + Other Costs+ GST = $24,971.43

Nov 2013: 213,197.58 kWh@ $0.02.8645 = $6,107.08 + Other Costs+ GST = $19,475.01 Nov 2014: 218,680.22 kWh@ $0.05.7070 = $12,480.08 + Other Costs+ GST = $23,693.93 Nov 2015: 229,218.13 kWh @$0.05.7734 = $13,233.65 + Other Costs+ GST = $25,381.41 Nov 2016: 229,505.45 kWh@ $0.05.6790 = $13,033.61 + Other Costs+ GST = $22,700.79

Dec 2013: 217,706.44 kWh@ $0.05.3167 = $11,574.80 + Other Costs+ GST = $22,569.79 Dec 2014: 224,392.21 kWh@ $0.05.7070 = $12,806.06 + Other Costs+ GST = $22,922.90 Dec 2015: 227,686.99 kWh@ $0.05.7070 = $13,121.72 + Other Costs+ GST = $24,836.19 Dec 2016:  223,975.58 kWh@ $0.05.6790 = $12,719.57 + Other Costs+ GST = $22,349.25

l.l N K

SPO TSPl.EX

Crosslink County Sportsplex

Program Registrations

Learn To Skate

US, U8 & U11 Soccer(U11 added in 2016)

Spring 2016: 140 Registrations Spring 2015 : 95 Registrations Spring 2014: 108 Registrations

Fall 2016 : 72 Registrations Fall 2015: 77  Registrations Fa ll 2014: 40 Registrations

Total 2016:  212

Total 2015: 172

Total 2014:  148

Spring Break Camp

2016: 48 Registrations

2015: 31    Registrations

2014:  30   Registrations

Summer Camps

2016:  174     Registrations

2015: 205    Registrations

2014:    70    Registrations

Crosslink County Sportsplex

Drop-In/ Program Revenue 2013 – 2016

Increase Comparison 2013 to 2016: 69.5%

Fieldhouse Drop-In 2013: $28,124

Fiel dho use Drop-In/Youth Soccer 2014: $68,031 Fieldhouse Drop-In/Youth Soccer 2015: $94,256 Fieldhouse Drop-In/Youth Soccer 2016: $90,813

Increase Comparison 2013 to 2016: 223%

Crosslink County Sportsplex Facility Rental Revenue 2013 – 2016

Increase Comparison 2013 to 2016: 34.69%

Increase Comparison 2013 to 2016: 114%

Issue Summary Report

3.8.  1:15 p.m. AEP County Update

#20170221010

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Scheduled Time : 13:15

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

AEP representatives unable to attend this meeting but are confirmed for the June 15th 2017 RAC meeting. Jim Hammond to provide a short summary.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

23% of the County is Crown land. At the December Recreation Advisory Committee (RAC) meeting, Council identified a need to be more knowledgeable about Provincial management of these areas so they could better answer the questions brought to them by rate payers.

Jim and Christine discussed this need, and recognizing that recreation is a big part of how the public utilizes this Crown land, decided that the RAC could be a forum where Council and Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP) could meet.

At the January monthly County administration – AEP meeting the concept was discussed. AEP responded favourably to the idea, indicating that AEP currently meets regularly with the Council of the MD of Mackenzie so as to keep them informed. The following are excerpts from the January meeting minutes:

1. Jim reviewed a Council request that they wished to be better informed about activities/ initiatives on public lands in the County, so they could better respond to rate payer questions.
2. Both Jim and Jack also saw the meetings as a way that each group could educate the other, and also provide an exchange of expectations.
3. Jack observed that AEP is already meeting on a regular basis with the Council of the MD of MacKenzie.
4. It was agreed that AEP would support trying such meetings, with Jack and Dion Lawrence being regular attendees, and other attendees varying with agenda topics. Maximum frequency would be quarterly, with Jack and Jim circulating agendas in a timely manner to allow AEP to line up appropriate attendees (ie.Okey Obiajulu for Water Act and EPEA matters).

At the March 2 monthly County administration – AEP meeting, the topic was once again discussed. Unfortunately Dion Lawrence is not available for March 16, so the first quarterly meeting with AEP will be June

15. Dion indicated that if Councillors wish to contact him between now and then, he would welcome any questions they may have.

Moving Forward:

Council should let Jim or Christine know what topics they wish to discuss with AEP at least 10 days in advance of the June 15 RAC meeting, so AEP can bring the correct personnel to the meeting. It is possible that personnel outside of AEP will be needed should questions surface which are outside of their Ministry’s scope (ie. First Nations Consultation).

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

For information

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs

1. Unfinished Business

4.1.                          ALTERNATIVE TRAIL SURFACES

4.2.                          EVENT SPONSORSHIP DATA

Issue Summary Report

4.1.  Alternative Trail Surfaces

#20170119003

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

Administration were requested to provide more technical information on the life cycle costs of alternative recreational trail surfaces, over and above the information presented at RAC on December 15, 2016.

Extensive research was conducted with limited success – there is very little comparative data available, especially within Canada and specific to northern climates.The most comprehensive published data found was a 2012 research report from Illinois, USA titled “Developing Best Practices for Bicycle Trail Pavement Construction and Maintenance in Illinois” which compared hot mix asphalt (HMA) to concrete to aggregate surfaces over a 20 year period.

That report concluded that while aggregate trails have the lowest initial construction cost, they are the most expensive to maintain (labour), and in that particular research study, that asphalt is almost equal in total cost to aggregate over the life cycle of the trail. Granted, additional savings could be made to the labour and maintenance costs of aggregate trails depending on the volume of use, spectrum of users and service level expectations of the community. However, when the rehabilitation cost percentage was applied to known local Canadian initial trail construction costs, aggregate offers the best total value over a 20 year life cycle.

Trail life expectancy can vary greatly depending on the type of user, volume, climate, and quality of construction. Concrete typically has a lifespan of 20 – 25 years, asphalt 10 – 15 years and aggregate 5 – 8 years.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

The complete research report can be found at: https://apps.ict.illinois.edu/projects/getfile.asp?id=3057

Chapter 4 (page 37) refers to Life Cycle Cost Analysis – key sections have been included as an attachment including detailed tabulations on costs (initial construction + rehabilitation) for each of the three surfaces. The Pavement Type Cost Analysis Summary table (A) below is transcribed from the report and provides data for 5,280 ft (1 mile) of trail at 10 ft width for all surfaces:

The ranking of initial pricing costs in this table mirrors the ranking of the local pricing information presented at the December RAC meeting (see attached for original Issue Summary Report) – concrete highest, asphalt second most expensive, with aggregate (gravel) the lowest cost option of the three. If the US data for

rehabilitation costs in Illinois is extrapolated for Northern Alberta, and a similar percentage for rehabilitation costs be applied to known local Canadian costs, it could be inferred that the Total Life-Cycle Cost for the three surfaces would be:

Using these projections, the aggregate trail surface offers the best total value over a 20 year life cycle.

Polymer modified asphalts (PMA) were also researched and can extend the lifespan of a trail although no cost comparisons were available. The table below shows Expected Service Life Increase for a 20 year Design:

In general, polymer modification increases the life of asphalt pavement overlay by 2.5 – 10 years, especially the resistance to transverse and longitudinal cracking, but not the resistance to rutting. PMA performance is dependent on several key factors: traffic, climate, existing pavement condition, etc. Local Grande Prairie asphalt suppliers currently use a polymer blend specific to the northern Alberta climate.

While all are not necessarily suitable for northern Alberta climates, there are a number of products are available as stabilizers for trail surfaces. Some of the most common include:

Soiltac® – This is an eco-safe, biodegradable, liquid copolymer used to stabilize and solidify soil or aggregate and is also used for erosion control and dust suppression.

Poly Pavement – This product is a liquid soil solidifier that converts native soils into a durable wear surface.

Natural Pave – Natural Pave XL resin pavement binder emulsion is mixed with aggregate materials to produce compacted pavement surfaces that retain the natural coloration and texture of the constituent aggregate material. Resin pavement mixtures contain no petroleum ingredients

and are appropriate for use in sensitive natural environments, including access to beach, estuary and riparian areas.

EMC Squared – EMC Squared is highly effective in improving the stability behavior of a broad spectrum of aggregate and soil materials for service applications in a wide variety of climatic conditions. The product technology is both user-friendly and environmentally affable.

StaLok/Stabilizer – Made from ground seed hulls of the plantego plant native to Arizona. Stabilizer is a nontoxic, non-staining organic soil stabilizer. StaLock is a polymer enhanced version of the 20-year-old product.

Soil-Sement – Soil-Sement is an environmentally safe, advanced powerful polymer emulsion that produces highly effective dust control, erosion control and soil stabilization.

Roadbond EN-1 – This product contains a strong oxidizer, a powerful solvent and a natural dispersant. The interaction of these components activates the naturally occurring mineral cements in the soil and bonds the soil grains together.

Mountain Grout – Mountain Grout is a soil stabilizer. Sprayed onto or mixed into the sand, Mountain Grout binds with the sand to form a hardened surface within hours.

Dura Road PX-300 – This is a liquid copolymer soil stabilization product which produces an abrasion and water resistant surface made of natural soil.

Lignosite – This is a byproduct of the calcium bisulfite pulping process.

RoadOyl – This product is a resin-modified emulsion that provides treatment for bare earth or unpaved surfaces. Formulated from tree resin, this state-of-the-art emulsion is unique in its high bonding strength and is appropriate for use even in close proximity to wetland areas and other areas of environmental sensitivity.

Klingstone – Klingstone 400 is a moderate viscosity, single component, moisture curing liquid (polymer) designed to stabilize soils for foot traffic and light vehicular traffic.

Permazyme 11X – This product produces all weather roads, increases compaction up to 15% with no extra effort, it is environmentally safe.

Earthzyme – This product is a totally natural bio-degradable product. It improves a soil’s physical and chemical properties, which result in significantly less mechanical effort to achieve greater densities. For use in soils less than 20% clay, binds only with clay particles, not silts, sands or gravels.

All of these products come in powder and/or liquid form and are applied topically or are mixed in with the soils or imported aggregate material. More information on each of these products can be found using the website links provided in the Appendix.

Industrial Byproducts

• Fly ash is a byproduct obtained from the stacks of coal-burning power plants.
• Bottom ash is the coarse, granular, incombustible by-product collected from the bottom of furnaces that burn coal for the generation of steam, the production of electric power, or both.

Natural Plant/Animal Byproducts

• Crushed Pecan Shells
• Shredded Wood
• Engineered Wood Chips
• Crushed Oyster Shells

Native Soils

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

For information

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs

APPENDIX A:   LIFE-CYCLE COST ANALYSIS DETAILED TABULATIONS

Table A.1. Conventional Asphalt Pavement Cost Tabulations

ITEM

INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST

Removal & Disposal of Umuitable Matl                                  0           1220        ClND    s     22.34     $        27,254.80    $        27,254.80

Aggregate Base Crse, Type B 4.5″                                         0           5867      SQYD   $        4.81    $       28,220.27   s      28,220.27

Bituminous  Materials (Prime Coat)                                        0           2934       GAL    $        2.67   s       7,833.78   s       7,833.78

Hot-Mix Asphalt Surface Crse, Mix “C”, N 30, 3″ Mat                 0            986       TON    $       85.00    $       83,810.00   $       83,810.00

Root Barrier , 12″ depth                                                      ()                 1056        LF    s       3.70   $          3,907.20    $         3,907.20

REHABILITATION COSTS

Crack Routing                                                                  2            528       FOOT   $        O.Ql $              5.28   s         4.98

Crack Filling                                                                     2            211     POUND $        2.42   s       510.62   $           481.31

Class D Patches , Type II, 3″                                                 2            59    SQYD   $       61.02   $         3,600.18   $         3,393.51

Mobilization/Demobi IIzation                                                 2           10%           lSUM    s  4,116.08     $           411.61   $           387.98

Bitumionus Matis (Seal and Cover Coat)                                4           1173       GAL    $         2.80   $          3,284.40    $         2,918.15

MobiIization/Demobllization                                                4                 10%      lSUM   $   3,284.40   $            328.44   $            291.81

Crack Routing                                                                  8            370       FOOT   $         0.01    $               3.70   $                2.92

Crack Filling                                                                     8            148     POUND $        2.42    $           358.16   $            282.73

Class D Patches, Type II, 3″                                                  8            59        SQYD   $       61.02     $         3,600.18   $         2,842.02

Bitumionus Matis (Seal and Cover Coat)                                8           1173       GAL    $         2.80   $          3,284.40   $         2,592.74

Mob IIization/De mobiIization                                                8           10″/4     LSUM   s  7,246.44    $           724.64   $           572.04

Bitu mionus Matis (Seal and Cover Coat)                                12          1173       GAL    $         2.80   s     3,284.40   s     2,303.61

Mobilization/Demobilization                                                12           10″/4     LSUM   s 3,284. 40   $            328.44   $            230.36

Crack Routing                                                                 14           370       FOOT  s     0 . 01   $              3.70   $               2. 45

Crack Filling                                                                    14           148     POUND $         2.42    $           358.16    $            236.79

Class O Patches , Type 11, 4″                                                14            59        SQYD   $       61.02   $          3,600.18   $         2,380.14

MobiIization/Demobilization                                                 14           10%      LSUM    $   3,962.04    $           396.20   $           261.94

Bitumionus Matis (Seal and Cover Coat)                                16          1173       GAL    $         2.80   s       3,284.40    $         2,046.73

MobiIization/Demobilization                                                 16          10%      LSUM    $   3,284.40   s      3 28.44   $            204.67

SALVAGE VALUE                                                                20                                                             N/A                    N/A

         INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST $     173,679.96   s    173,679.96

                   REHABILITATION COST $       27,695.54   $       21,436.88

              TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST $    201,375.49    $     195!116.83

A-1

Table A.2. Conventional Portland Cement Pavement Cost Tabulations

REHABILITATION COSTS

Crack Routing                                                                  6                  528       FOOT   $        1.28    s         675.84    $            566.01

        INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST $      306,141.65   $       306,141.65

REHABILITATION COST $      14,311.80   $        10,143.53

             TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST  $   317,272.89   $  314,524.18

A-2

Table A.3. Aggregate Surface Cost Tabulations

UNIT                                      PRESENT

ITEM                                                                    YEAR     QUANTITY  UNIT        PRICE               COST                 WORTH

INITIAL CONSTRUCTION COST

Removal & Disposal of Unsuitable Matl                                  0           1631      CUYD   $      22.34   $        36,436.54     $       36,436.54

Geotextile                                                                        0           5867      SQYO   $        1.93    s     11,323.31   $        11,323.31

Aggregate Base Crse, Type 8, 7.0″                                         0                 5867      SQYD   $      11.99    $        70,345.33   s      70,345.33

Trail Mix Aggregate, 3″                                                       0            880        TON    $      22.00    $       19,360.00   $        19,360.00

Mobilization/Demoblllzation                                                 0           10%      LSUM  $137,465.18   $       13,746.52   $        13,746.52

Engineering and Construction lnseection                               0            5%       LSUM   $ 137,465.18  $         6,873.26   s       6,873.26

REHABILITATION COSTS

Manpower                                                                       1            48       HOUR   $       43.39   $          2,082.72   $         2,022.06

Vehicle                                                                           1            48            HOUR   $       11.63    $           558.24   $           541.98

Material                                                                           1                 0.50       TON    $       80.00   $             40.00   s          38.83

Manpower                                                                       2            48        HOUR   $       43.39    $         2,082.72   $         1,963.16

Vehicle                                                                            2                   48            HOUR  $      11.63   $            558.24   $            526.19

Material                                                                          2                  0.50       TON    $       80.00   $             40.00   $              37.70 

Manpower                                                                       3            48           HOUR   $      43.39   $          2,082.72   $          1,905.98

Vehicle                                                                            3            48            HOUR   $      11. 63   $           558.24    $            510.87

Material                                                                           3           0.50       TON    $       80.00   $             40.00   $             36.61

Manpower                                                                       4            48            HOUR   $      43.39   s       2,082.72   $         1,850.47

Vehicle                                                                           4            48            HOUR  $      11.63   $           558.24   $           495.99

Material                                                                           4           0.50       TON    $      80.00   $              40.00   s          35.54

Manpower                                                                       5             48           HOUR   $      43.39   $          2,082.72   $         1, 796.57

Vehicle                                                                            5            48           HOUR   $       11.63    $           558.24    $           481.54

Material                                                                           5           0.50       TON    $       80.00   $              40.00   $             34.50

Manpower                                                                       6            48            HOUR   $      43.39   $          2,082.72   $         1,744.25

Vehicle                                                                            6            48           HOUR   $      11.63    $           558.24   $             467.52

Material                                                                           6           0.50       TON    $       80.00   $              40.00   $             33.50

Manpower                                                                       7            48            HOUR   $      43.39   $          2,082.72   $         1,693.44

Vehide                                                                            7            48            HOUR   $      11.63    $           558.24   $            453.90

Material                                                                           7                 0.50       TON    $       80.00   $             40.00   $             32.52

Manpower                                                                       8            48            HOUR  s     43.39   $          2,082.72    $         1,644.12

Vehicle                                                                           8            48        HOUR  s     11 . 63    $           558.24   $            440.68

Material                                                                          8            a.so    TON    $      80.00   $             40.00    $              31.58

Manpower                                                                       9            48        HOUR   $      43.39   $          2,082.72   $         1,596.23

Vehicle                                                                           9             48       HOUR   $      11.63   s       558.24   $            427.84

Material                                                                           9           0.50       TON    $       80.00   $              40.00    $              30.66

A-3

Table A.3 Continued. Aggregate Surface Cost Tabulations

Manpower                                                                                                             10                  48            HOUR   $        43.39    $          2,082.72    $          1,549 . 74

Vehide                                                                                                                    10                 48            HOUR  $       11.63    $           558.24    $          415.38

Material                                                                                                                  10                0.50            TON    $       80.00  $             40.00    $            29.76

Manpower                                                                                                              11                   48            HOUR   $       43.39    $          2,082.72    $                                                                                     1,504.60

Vehicle                                                                                                                   11           48        HOUR   $       11.63    s         558.24    s        403.28

Material                                                                                                                  11          0.50            TON    $       80.00   $             40.00   $            28.90

Manpower                                                                                                              12                  48        HOUR  $       43.39   $          2,082.72   $                                                                                     1,460.78

Vehicle                                                                                                                   12                  48        HOUR   $       11 .63    $            558.24    $           391.54

Material                                                                                                                 12                0.50            TON    $       80.00  $              40.00   $            28.06

Manpower                                                                                                              13                  48        HOUR  $       43.39   $          2,082.72   $                                                                                     1,418.23

Vehicle                                                                                                                   13            48        HOUR   $        11.63     $           558.24   $           380.13

Material                                                                                                                 13                 0.50            TON    $       80.00   $              40.00   $            27.24

Manpower                                                                     14                  48        HOUR   $           43 .39   $          2,08272    $                                                                                     1,376.92

Vehicle                                                                                                                   14                  48            HOUR  $       11.63    $            558.24    $          369.06

Material                                                                                                                  14                0.50            TON    $       80.00   $              40.00   $            26.44

Manpower                                                                                                             15                  48            HOUR  $       43.39   $          2,082.72   $                                                                                     1,336.82

Vehicle                                                                                                                   15                  48            HOUR   $       11.63   s         558.24    $          358.31

Material                                                                                                                 15                o.so      TON    $        80.00  $             40.00   s        25.67

Manpower                                                                                                             16                  48            HOUR   $        43.39    $          2,082.72   s                                                                1,297.88

Vehicle                                                                                                                   16                  48            HOUR  $       11.63    $            558.24   $          347.88

Material                                                                                                                 16                0.50           TON    $       80.00   $             40.00   s         24.93

Manpower                                                                                                             17                  48            HOUR  $       43.39   $          2,082.72   $                                                                                     1,260.08

Vehicle                                                                                                                   17                  48        HOUR   s     11 .63     $           558 .24   s       337.74

Material                                                                                                                 17                0.50           TON    $        80.00    $              40.00   $            24.20

Manpower                                                                                                             18                  48            HOUR   $        43.39   $          2,082.72    $         1, 223. 38

Vehicle                                                                                                                   18                 48            HOUR  $        11.63    $            558.24    $          327.91

Material                                                                                                                  18                0.50            TON    $       80.00   s          40.00   $            23.50

Manpower                                                                                                             19                  48            HOUR  $       43.39    $          2,082 .72   $                                                                                     1,187.75

Vehicle                                                                                                                   19                  48           HOUR   $       11.63    $            558 .24    $         318.36

Material                                                                                                                  19                0.50            TON    $       80.00   $              40.00   s        22.81

REHABILITATION COST  $         50,938.24    s                                38,401.53

           TOTAL LIFE CYCLE COST $ 209,023.20  $           196,486.49

A-4

CHAPTER 4       LIFE-CYCLE COST ANALYSIS

Bicycle trails are constructed in a variety of locations. Based on construction location and site conditions, construction costs vary widely. Studies of asphalt trails show costs in the range of $45,000 to $833,000 per mile, while studies on aggregate trails found costs ranging from $23,000 to $370,000 (Luttrell et al. 2004). Obviously, very poor subgrade materials, intense grubbing with tree removal, and difficult site access increase the per-mile cost.

Therefore, the costs and quantities involved in the life-cycle cost analysis follow “average” trail construction requirements and maintenance needs.

This chapter first presents a discussion of quantities and costs and then presents the life-cycle cost analyses. The analyses include only those aspects discussed in this report, which focus solely on the pavement system. The analyses do not consider costs for drainage components, shoulders, signage, trail heads, intersections, or traffic control markings.

For tasks that closely correspond to an SSBRC coded pay item, costs were determined based on the most recent IDOT pay item report available with sufficient quantities to calculate a realistic, representative cost. Costs were estimated for those tasks that did not have a closely corresponding SSBRC coded pay item based on material, labor, and equipment components of the task.

4.1  COST ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT SURFACE TYPES

Some surface types have a lower initial construction cost, but the initial savings may be overcome by increased maintenance costs associated with the trail surface. This section examines the 20-year costs associated with each trail type, without considering an end-of­ life rehabilitation method. This analysis assumed that the trail surface will either be in satisfactory condition after the 20-year period or the reduced level of surface is allowable.

Design inputs for pavement design vary based on factors discussed in Chapter 2.

However, for all the analyses in this section, the following inputs were used:

• Regular-duty pavement use factor
  • Medium subgrade traffic factor
  • Subgrade = IBR 3
    • High water table (within 20 inches of the bottom of the aggregate base)
    • 10-foot trail width
    • 1 mile (5280 feet) trail length segment

The following construction assumptions were used for all analyses in this section:

• The top of the constructed pavement layer matches the existing grade. For example, if the pavement structure (aggregate base and surface material) is 7.5

inches thick, the top 7.5 inches of in situ material on the trail alignment will be removed .

• No additional grubbing or material removal is required beyond the depth of removal necessary for the constructed pavement layer to match the existing

grade.

• Trees are within close proximity to the trail for 20% of its overall length. For this example, 1056 feet of root barrier will need to be installed for the 1-mile trail segment.

37

• Mobilization and demobilization were estimated at 10% of the project value for both the initial construction and maintenance actions.
• Site engineering and construction management tasks were estimated at 5% of the initial construction value. No site engineering and construction management costs were applied to the maintenance items.

The life-cycle cost analysis used a 3% discount rate. The salvage value was based on the remaining life of a maintenance procedure at the end of the analysis period. A prorated value of the maintenance procedure was used as the salvage value.

Present worth was determined by Equation 11.

k       (I +i)”‘

(11)

where MCk is the maintenance cost in year k, i is the discount rate, and nk is the year of expenditure.

4.1.1  Conventional Hot-Mix Asphalt Surface

Based on the design inputs for this cost analysis, the pavement is composed of 4.5 inches of aggregate base with a 3-inch HMA surface. The following assumptions were used when calculating the initial construction cost:

• Prime coat will be applied to the aggregate base at a rate of 0.50 gallons per square yard.
• The HMA surface will be constructed in one lift on top of the aggregate base. This requires the use of the IL-9.5L mix asphalt.
  • The compacted HMA mat will have a density of 112 pounds per square yard per inch of thickness.

The following assumptions were made about maintenance:

• Patching-1% of the pavement surface area will require patching after the first 2 years. For each subsequent 6-year period, 1% of the pavement surface area will require patching. For this analysis, all patches will be Class D, Type II patches as described in the SSBRC.
  • Crack Sealing-After the first 2 years, a length equal to 10% of the pavement length will require crack sealing. For each subsequent 6-year period, a length equal to 7% of the pavement length will require crack sealing . All cracks will be routed prior to sealing. Sealant material will be installed at 0.4 pounds per linear foot.
    • Seal Coat-Application will be at 0.2 gallons per square yard.

Since all maintenance actions will have no life remaining at the end of the analysis period, no salvage value is included in the analysis .

38

4.1.2  Conventional Portland Cement Concrete Surface

Based on the design inputs for this cost analysis, the pavement is composed of 4.5 inches of aggregate base with a 5-inch slab thickness. The following assumptions were used when calculating the initial construction cost:

• Dowel bars at construction joints and expansion joints (if needed) are included in the unit cost for the PCC pavement.

The following assumptions were made about maintenance:

• Patching-For each 6-year period, 1% of the pavement surface area will require patching. For this analysis, all patches will be Class C, Type II patches as described in the SSBRC.
• Crack Sealing-For each 6-year period, a length equal to 10% of the pavement length will require crack sealing. All cracks will be routed prior to sealing. Sealant material will be installed at 0.4 pounds per linear foot.

A salvage value was included, since the final set of maintenance tasks performed at year 18 will stlll have 4 years of life at the end of the analysis. Therefore, the salvage value was equal to 67% of the year 18 maintenance costs.

4.1.3  Aggregate Surface

Based on the design inputs for this cost analysis, the pavement is composed of 7 inches of aggregate base with a 3-inch TMA surface. The following assumptions were used when calculating the initial construction cost:

• The aggregate surface will have a compacted density of 100 pounds per square yard per inch.
• No root barrier will be installed because surface irregularities caused by tree roots will be negligible compared to surface irregularities caused by other environmental factors.

The following assumptions were made about maintenance. Since maintenance on aggregate paths consists primarily of manual labor, the following assumptions include personnel, vehicular, and material costs:

• It will require 4 man hours of labor per month to keep the 1-mile length of trail in satisfactory condition. The manual labor will be provided by a single person. This equates to 48 man hours per year. Personnel costs are based on the March 2012 prevailing wage for Champaign County, which includes the base rate, health and welfare insurance, pension, and training (Illinois Department of Labor, n.d.).
  • Five hundred pounds of aggregate surface material will be required for maintenance per year.
  • One pickup truck will be required during these maintenance activities. Vehicle cost is based on the 2004 IDOT Schedule of Average Annual Equipment Ownership Expense, using the 2011 calendar-year index factor (most current available).

39

Since no maintenance actions will have life remaining at the end of the analysis period, no salvage value was included in the analysis.

4.1.4  Conclusion

Detailed spreadsheets entailing quantities, unit prices, and present values can be found in Appendix A. For convenience, the final cost figures for each trail type are summarized in Table 19.

Table 19. Pavement Type Cost Analysis Summary

4.2  COST ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT PAVEMENT USE FACTORS

Some trail locations might dictate the pavement use factor used for design. Cost savings can be realized if traffic types on the trail pavement can be limited. This section examines the potential savings from a lower pavement use factor.

Design inputs vary from area to area. However, the following inputs were used for all analyses in this section:

• Medium subgrade traffic factor
• Subgrade = IBR 4
  • Low water table (deeper than 20 inches from the bottom of the aggregate base)
    • 10-foot trail width
    • 1 mile (5280 feet) trail length segment

The following construction assumptions were used for all analyses in this section:

• The top of the constructed pavement layer matches the existing grade. For example, if the pavement structure (aggregate base and surface material) is 7.5

inches thick, the top 7.5 inches of in situ material on the trail alignment will be removed.

• No root barrier is needed.
• Mobilization and demobilization were estimated at 10% of the project value, for the initial construction.
  • Site engineering and construction management tasks were estimated at 5% of the initial construction value.

For this comparison, a conventional PCC surface was evaluated for both a mile of trail built under the regular-duty pavement use factor and a mile of trail built under the heavy-duty pavement use factor. Since the same surface material was used for this

analysis, the maintenance costs were the same. Therefore, only initial costs were examined.

40

Using the design procedure outlined in Chapter 2, 3 inches of aggregate base are needed based on the subgrade traffic factor, IBR, and water table location. A 5-inch-thick PCC slab is needed for the regular-duty pavement use factor, and a 7-inch-thick PCC slab is needed for the heavy-duty pavement use factor.

Detailed spreadsheets entailing quantities, unit prices, and present values can be found in Appendix B. For convenience, the final cost figures for each trail type are summarized in Table 20.

Table 20. Conventional PCC Surface

      Pavement Use Factor Cost Analysis Summary

Pavement Use Factor                    Initial Cost ($)

Light Duty/Regular Duty                      295,302.69

Heavy Duty                                         377,972.58

4.3  COST ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC FACTORS

The trail alignment and surroundings may dictate the construction traffic factor. In some locations, innovative thinking about construction sequences and processes may allow an agency to use a lower construction traffic factor.

Design inputs vary from area to area. However, the following inputs were used for all analyses in this section:

• Regular-duty pavement use factor
  • Subgrade = IBR 2
    • Low water table (deeper than 20 .in ches from the bottom of the aggregate base)
    • 10-foot trail width
    • 1 mile (5280 feet) trail length segment

The following construction assumptions were used for all analyses in this section:

• The top of the constructed pavement layer matches the existing grade. For example, if the pavement structure (aggregate base and surface material) is 7.5 inches thick, the top 7.5 inches of in situ material on the trail alignment will be removed.
• No root barrier is needed.
  • Mobilization and demobilization were estimated at 10% of the project value, for the initial construction.
    • Site engineering and construction management tasks were estimated at 5% of the initial construction value.

For this comparison, a conventional HMA surface was evaluated for both a mile of trail built under the medium construction traffic factor and a mile of trail built under the high construction traffic factor. Since the same surface material was used for this analysis, the maintenance costs were the same. Therefore, only initial costs were examined.

Using the design procedure outlined in Chapter 2, 4.5 inches of aggregate base are needed for the medium construction traffic factor and 7 inches of aggregate base are needed for the high construction traffic factor. A 3-inch HMA mat is placed over both aggregate bases.

41

Detailed spreadsheets entailing quantities, unit prices, and present values can be found in Appendix C. The final cost figures for each trail type are summarized in Table 21.

Table 21. Conventional Asphalt Surface Construction Traffic Factor Cost Analysis Summary

Construction Traffic Factor             Initial Cost($)

Medium                                                  169,186.68

High                                                       212,536 .34

42

Issue Summary Report

Alternative Trail Surfaces                                                                                                        #20161129008

Meeting: Recreation Advisory Committee – December 2016

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2016/12/15 10:00

Executive Summar                                                                                                                                                              

A request was made at the October 6, 2016 Recreation Advisory Committee meeting for Administration to bring back a report on trail surfaces which would be a suitable alternative to asphalt. The trail pricing below was sourced via Wapiti Paving/ Reco and includes engineering plus base preparation.

Back round                                                                                                                                                              

Walking/ bicycling trail systems ranked as the number two outdoor amenity in the 2016 Grande Prairie Area Joint Recreation Master Plan, following mountain bike trails at number one. The optimum trail surface for any project is dependent on the terrain that it crosses, the function of the trail, targeted users and the budget of the municipality or developer . Options include:

1: Concrete: The most durable trail surface (20 year life span), but has the highest

cost.Resi sts washout leaving a clean surface during and after rains . Does not need a gravel base so less preparation than asphalt. One disadvantage is in winter conditions, salt on concrete can be detrimental and creates the potential for heaving. It offers minimal shock absorbency and it can be very hard on runner’s joints. Costs: Approximately $260.00 / meter; $ 418,340.00 / mile

2: Asphalt: This is often the preferred trail surface as it is more sturdy than gravel and cheaper than concrete. However, asphalt is prone to cracking, therefore regular maintenance has to be completed every year to crack seal the surface. Asphalt trails have a lifespan of 10 -15 years which makes it a cost effective way of providing trails, and are very user friendly for bikes, strollers, motorized scooters and wheelchairs. Costs: Approximately

$150.00 I meter; $241,350.00 / mile

3: Gravel: Typically used for rural trails and because of its affordability . Gravel is best suited for flat areas

but requires significant maintenance as it is hard to maintain consistent surface quality through gravel erosion, along with vegetation management. Gravel trails can be dug in and packed for stability if needed. For bikers and runners , steep gravel slopes can be challenging to traverse; loosely packed gravel makes it difficult for strollers and wheelchairs to navigate. Can be subject to very soft and wet conditions in fall and spring. Very difficult to remove silt deposits after heavy rains. Costs: Approximately $80.00 / meter; $128,720.00 / mile

4: Wood Chips: Blend well environmentally and can be optimal for runners and equestrians however the surface decomposes quickly, cannot accommodate wheelchairs and requires constant maintenance. The entire surface on average needs replacement every couple of years. Costs: Approximately $52.50 / meter; $84,472.50

/mile

5: Natural Earth: Offer inexpensive construction and maintenance costs, and are best suited for natural

areas. Not suitable for areas with invasive vegetation, creeks or soil subject to erosion. Costs: No average price per meter available; dependent on scope of project

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                              

Option 1: Accept as informat ion

Page 1 of 2

Issue Summary Report

4.2.  Event Sponsorship Data

#20170303003

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

At the December 19, 2016 Council meeting, Administration was directed by a motion to bring forward information on sponsorship categories that Council has approved in the past 4-5 years. Data was available for the years 2013 – 2016 inclusive, a four year span. Three main classifications were used:

1: Dine and Dance: Any event or fundraiser with a meal, dancing, tickets to attend. Can include a breakfast or daytime event also.

2: Golf Tournaments: Includes total event, hole sponsorship or sending players to participate

3: Other Event Based Sponsorship: Any event or activity that is somewhat similar to a Dine & Dance or Golf Tournament but falls outside their immediate definition

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

The complete database is attached in a spreadsheet. The following tables summarize key information:

Table A: Total Amount Received by Groups per Event

Table B: Average Amount Received by Groups per Event

Table C: Range of Amount Received by Groups per Event

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

Option 1) Accept as information

Option 2) Use information provided to create a more structured sponsorship matrix

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs

Appendix 1 for 4.2.: Event Sponsorship Data

Appendix 1 for 4.2.: Event Sponsorship Data

Appendix 1 for 4.2.: Event Sponsorship Data

Appendix 1 for 4.2.: Event Sponsorship Data

Appendix 1 for 4.2.: Event Sponsorship Data

Appendix 1 for 4.2.: Event Sponsorship Data

1. 5.         New Business

5.1.                          MUD BOG LAND REQUEST

Issue Summary Report

5.1. Mud Bog Land Request

#20170310008

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

Parks & Recreation received a request from Abe Braun to assist with finding a suitable location to hold mud bog races within the County. Mr Braun has approached some private landowners and is seeking to lease 20-30 acres on a 2- 5 year term to host two mud bog events per year.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

Mr. Braun previously hosted his event at the Grande Prairie airport for two years, then Evergreen Par (1 year) and has been operating in Wembley for the past two years.

There would be 3 x 200 ft long mud pits, each 3 ft deep. Mr. Braun offered to reclaim the land at the end of each year. The County’s Agriculture Fieldman Sonja Raven would prefer that that the pits were left in each year and that once the original topsoil is removed, that it be conserved.

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

Option 1) Approve Parks & Recreation to work with Mr. Braun to assist in the location of suitable land Option 2) Take no action

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs

1. 6.         Sponsorship Requests

6.1.                          SPONSORSHIP REQUEST SUMMARY – NEW

6.2.                          SPONSORSHIP REQUEST – HOSPITAL BED RACES

6.3.                          SPONSORSHIP REQUEST – GPRC COLLEGE CLASSIC

6.4.                          SPONSORSHIP REQUEST – GPRC PRESIDENTS BALL

6.5.                          SPONSORSHIP REQUEST – SKILLS CANADA

6.6.                          SPONSORSHIP REQUEST – SOUTH PEACE CENTENNIAL MUSEUM 50TH ANNIVERSARY

6.7.                          SPONSORSHIP REQUEST – EVERGREEN HIGH SCHOOL RODEO

6.8.                          GRANDE PRAIRIE STOMPEDE – SUSTAINABILITY FUND

Issue Summary Report

6.1.  Sponsorship Request Summary – NEW

#20170306011

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

A summary tool has been created by Administration to provide an overview of the sponsorship requests before they are individually presented at the quarterly RAC meetings. The goal is to provide an “at a glance” snapshot of the requests so that a more comprehensive evaluation of fund allocation can be made.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

Total funds in Community Assistance budget for 2017: $37,560

Quarterly potential distribution of Community Assistance funds (guideline only): $9,390

Total minimum requests from this RAC meeting: $8,949.58 (omitting Stompede GIK and Sustainability Fund) Average allocation per “Other Event” in 2016: $1,800.00

Average allocation per “Dine & Dance” in 2016: $1,833.33

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

For information

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs

Issue Summary Report

6.2.  Sponsorship Request – Hospital Bed Races

#20170125001

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

Request for Sponsorship.

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

Event info:

Saturday, Jul 1, 2017

Muskoseepi Park, following the Canada Day Parade

Sponsorship Opportunities:

Hospital Cup – $2,500 Start line – $2,500 Finish line – $2,500 Pit Crew – $1,500

Proceeds go to the Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Development Past Support:

The County has supported this event for $1,500 in the past.

Community Assistance:

There is $37,560 remaining in the 2017 Community Assistance budget

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

1  – Sponsor for $1,500

2  – Sponsor for a different amount 3 – No action

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs.

• In person at the Communit y Services Building – 10808 – 100 Ave, Cl ai rmont, AB. or;
  • By e-ma il to parksandrecreat ion@ count ygp.ab.ca.

Applicants will be contacted to confirm the Council meeting date an d time (if request ed). Please contact the Par ks and Recreation Department at (780) 532 – 9727 for more information.

Is the Request for a Sponsorship, for a Silent Auction item, or for a Letter of Support?

□

Will the requested funds be used for Operational or Capital improvements of recreation or

cultural organizations and/or facilities?          DvES** [8_]     NO

**If YES, please contact the Parks and Recreation Department at parksandrecreation@countygp.ab.cato inquire about the Recreation and Culture Grant process and application or visit the website at

http:// www.countygp.ab.ca/ EN/ main/government/ grants–scholarships/ capital –assista nce­ grants.html **

365 day time period or after a Municipal El ection , unless the request is approved by Council as per Procedural Bylaw #3001.

Please attach any additional information or documents to the Request Form and send via email to parksandrecreation@coun ty gp.ab.ca .

The Agenda Submission Guidelines (as per Part Five of Procedural Bylaw #3001) are attached for your review. If there are any questions in regards to the Agenda Submission Guidelines please contact Legislative Services at 780-532-9722.

Th’s ‘ nforrr.at:on sha.:: becorr,e pub /:c :nfor rr.at’on u,n e ss deerr.ed by the CAO to be con fident;a: and ·tn Carr.era· as per Procedura: By:av #3001. The persona’ inforrr.ation requested on th:s forrr. is befng co!!ected for Counc’ / Meeting Sponsorsh ip or Corr.rr.unity Assistance Grant Requests. under the authority of the Freedorr. of lnforrr.afon and Protection of Privacy (FOIP ) Act and is protected  by the FOIP  Act.  If you have questions about the coi/ec tfon. contact our FOIP Coordinator at (780 ) 532-9722.

County of Grande Prairie No  1 · 10001 – 84 Avenue · Clairmont, AB · TOH  OV/0 · Canada

Administration Building: 780-532-9722 · Community Services Building: 780-532-9727 · Fax: 780-539.a880

Muskoseepi Park – following the Canada Day Parade

Sponsorship Opportunities

Enjoy all the extra benefits of Sponsorship. We have several exciting opportunities available:

Hospital Cup, Start Line, Finish Line or Pit Crew.

Participant Opportunities

Show your support and competitive side! Register your team of five to claim a bed for race day.

Hurry, beds are limited. You don’t want to miss this event!

Dear Sponsor/Participant,

On behalf of the Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation, we would like to extend an invitation to you to join us as an official sponsor and/or participant of our very own Hospital Bed Races. This fun filled event will be held on July 1st in conjunction with the Canada Day celebrations at Muskoseepi Park.

With the growing population of our community and the excitement of the new Grande Prairie Regional Hospital’s ongoing construction, we want to help prepare for healthcare needs today and in the future. In order to do this we need your help in raising funds to purchase new hospital beds. Each new hospital bed costs approximately $8,000.00 and participating in this bed race will be a fun way to make a difference. Join us as we race to the finish line to enhance patient care in our community!

Since this event will be held in conjunction with the Canada Day Parade, there will be large crowds of spectators to cheer you on. The attached information further outlines sponsorship benefits and team participation for this event. For more information, please contact our office at (780) 538-7583 or visit our website at supportyourhospital.ca.

Sincerely,

Dawn Miller

Senior Development Officer

Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation

Hospital Cup Sponsor……. $2500

• • Official sponsor of the Hospital Cup
• • Logo on trophy – displayed pre and post race
• • Logo displayed on all beds and race banners
• • Logo on website, certificates, and print materials
• • Your company representative will present the trophy to the winning team

Start Line Sponsor………… $2500

• • Logo will be displayed on beds and race banners
• • Logo on website, certificates, and print materials
• • Your company representative will officially start all heats

Finish Line Sponsor………. $2500

• • Logo will be displayed on beds and race banners
• • Logo on website, certificates, and print materials
• • Your company representative will officially end all heats

Pit Crew Sponsor………….. $1500

• • Logo will be displayed on water bottle labels for participants
• • Logo will be displayed on a chocolate bar for participants
• • Company representatives act as the “pit crew” handing out refreshments
• • Logo on website and print materials

Sponsor/Company Name: ______________________________________________________________

Contact Person: ______________________________________________________________________

Address: ____________________________________________________________________________

City:

______________________________________ Postal Code:

____________________________

Phone:  ____________________________________   Fax: ___________________________________

Email Address: _______________________________________________________________________

Signature: ___________________________________________________________________________

Please make sponsorship cheques payable to:

Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation For more information please call (780) 538-7583

Please send this form to:

Fax: (780) 538-7597

Email: info@supportyourhospital.ca

Dear Participant,

Thank you for considering your participation in the Hospital Bed Races supporting the Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation. Your pledges will allow us to purchase beds for the QE II Hospital and the new Grande Prairie Regional Hospital thereby enhancing patient care in this community. We hope you have fun crossing the finish line!

Rules & Regulations:

1. You must be 18 years old to participate.
2. Hospital beds will be provided. Each team will have four members pushing the bed and a fifth member to ride on the bed. You can have extra team members acting as cheerleaders, pit crew etc.
   1. Corporate uniforms and/or team colors, as well as safety head gear are highly recommended.
   2. Teams are encouraged to dress up their bed, as well as provide signage for the foot board of the bed. Signage is recommended to fit within the footboard dimensions of 32″ (W) x 12″ (H).
   3. Teams are asked to attach decorations using nothing that may be damaging to the bed or difficult to remove after the race.
      1. Race route runs at Muskoseepi Park (exact location to follow), immediately following the Canada Day Parade.
      2. Each team member will collect pledges in order to participate. A suggested team pledge amount of $2,500.00 would be appreciated, but raise as much as you can for extra prizes and recognition!
         1. Completed Pledge Forms and monies will be collected on race day, Saturday, July 1st, 2017.
         2. Cheques can be made payable to Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation. Visa and MasterCard are accepted.
         3. Contributions of $20.00 or more will receive a charitable tax receipt. The Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation must receive pledge forms with complete addresses in order to issue tax receipts.
            1. Deadline for participant registration and race heat times will be announced.
            2. Each team will compete in at least one heat. The winners of each heat will compete in the finals.
            3. Release and Waiver of Liability must be signed and submitted by race day Saturday, July 1st, 2017.

Please visit supportyourhospital.ca for more information and extra forms.

Team Name: _________________________________________________________________________

Participant #1 (Team Leader): ___________________________________________________________

Participant     #2:    ________________________________________________________________________

Participant     #3:    ________________________________________________________________________

Participant     #4:    ________________________________________________________________________

Participant     #5:    ________________________________________________________________________

Company Name (if applicable): __________________________________________________________

Address: ____________________________________________________________________________

City:

______________________________________ Postal Code:

____________________________

Phone:  ____________________________________   Fax: ___________________________________

Email Address (Team Leader): ___________________________________________________________

Signature (Team Leader): _______________________________________________________________

Please send this form to:

Fax: (780) 538-7597

Email: info@supportyourhospital.ca

• Please make cheques payable to Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation.
• Bring completed form and monies collected on race day Saturday, July 1st, 2017.
• Tax receipts will be issued for donations of $20.00 or more (mailing address must be provided).
• Print Team Pledge Form for each team member

For more information contact the Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation at (780) 538-7583.          Charitable Registration #

119107175RR0001

Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation’s Hospital Bed Races

I,                                                                                  (print name) understand and accept that there     may be risk of injury associated with my participation in the Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation’s Hospital Bed Races.

I agree that the Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation is not responsible for any bodily injury, loss or damage to personal property, suffered by me, before, during or after participating in the Hospital Bed Races.  I further release the Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation and its’ agents, employees  and directors from liability of any personal injury and/or loss or damage that I may suffer as a result of my participation in the Hospital Bed Races which is being held in Grande Prairie on Saturday, July 1st, 2017.

I warrant that I am physically fit and have no medical condition that would prevent my full participation in the Hospital Bed Races.

I agree to assume full responsibility for any risks, injuries or damages, known or unknown, which I might incur as a result of participation in the Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation’s Hospital Bed Race event.

I agree to release the Grande Prairie Regional Hospital Foundation, and their agents and employees from all responsibility in connection with my use of ANY equipment for the Hospital Bed Races.

I have read the above Release and Waiver of Liability, and fully understand its’ contents. I have had the opportunity to ask questions and receive answers prior to signing this form. I voluntarily agree to the terms and conditions stated above.

Participant’s Signature : Date:

                             Print one copy of this form for each team member to date and sign.

Issue Summary Report

6.3.  Sponsorship Request – GPRC College Classic

#20170216002

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

Request for sponsorship. GPRC is seeking a three year commitment from the County (see attached letter).

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

Event info:

Friday, June 2, 2017

Sponsorship Opportunities:

Gold – $5,500

Silver

Tailgate Party – $3,500 Entertainment Hole – $3,500 Hole in one – $3,500 Reverse Draw – $3,500 Shoot out – $3,500

Bronze

Photo booth $2,500

Executive Team Wine – $1,500 Hole – $1,250 (shared)/$2,500

Putting green – $1,250 (shared)/$2,500 Driving range – $1,250 (shared)/$2,500

Past Support:

The County has supported this event for $1,250 in the past.

Community Assistance:

There is $37,560 remaining in the 2017 community assistance budget.

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

1  – Commit to sponsoring the event for three years. Recommend Council add GPRC College Classic to the ‘Grants Approved on an Annual Basis’ under Community Assistance for three years. RAC select the sponsorship level.

2  – Sponsor GPRC College Classic for one year 3 – No action

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs.

Ms. Shannon Baird County of Grande Prairie 10001 84 Ave.

Clair mont, AB TOH 0W0

December 14, 2016

County of

Grande p r_..,.·-:·

DEC 2 9 2016

50YEARS

OF STUDENT SUCCESS

Dear Shannon,

Thank you for making 2016 a truly successful event year for Grande Prai rie Regional College!

We are presenting our 2016 College Classic sponsors an exclusive opportun ity to renew or upgrade your sponsorship of this wonderful event for up to the next three years. This past year, you supported GPRC through shared Bronze sponsorship of the College Class ic, and we would be thrilled to welcome you as a t hree-year sponsor at this level. We would also be happy to  speak  with you about  other opportunities  for this event  and the President ‘s Ball , enclosed for your co nsiderati on.

The 2016 -17 academic year marks an important milestone in the history of our College, and we invite you to  share in the celebrations in a significant way. As we celebrate 50 years through various events and activities , we would be very pleased to have the County of Grande Prairie join us with a mult i-year commitment to one of our most significant annual fundraising endeavours.

GPRC has been committed to serving the vital needs of post -seco ndary access and opportunity in the Northern Alberta region for five decades, and we look forward to the next five… and beyond. Please join us as  we  continue to support our students, our College, our industry, and our region.

With warmest holiday wishes,

Heidi                o d

Campaign/Development Officer 780-539-2835

harbeauwood@gprc.ab.ca

Cari Foster

Sr. Ma nager , Events Services 780-539-2902

cfoster@gprc.ab.ca

PRC

2017 College Classic

FLETCHER

COLLEGE CLASSIC

Presented By

MUDRYK

& CD. LIi

CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS

Friday, June 2nd, 2017

Sponsorship Opportunities

For inqu iries, please contact :

Heidi ArbTePaDu1-W70o3od038 HArbeauWood @GPRC.Paba.gcaeI173800-5o3f91-288035

•Please note : HOLE IN ONE & SHOOT OUT SPONSORS – Any additional insurance above maximum included must be purchased by sponsor and submitted to the GPRC 2 weeks prior to the event (before Moy 20,2016}

Want to see your Company LOGO on a Green of your choice every year at the College Classic?

Ask about our limited three year sponsorship packages and we will put your logo on a custom Hole Flag!

..

For inquiries, please conta ct:

Heidi ArbeTaPuD-1W7o0o3d038 HArbeau Wood@GPRC.aPba.cgaeJ  718031- 5o3f9-1288305

KGrl{

PRESIDENT’S

2017 GPllC President’s Ball

Saturday , October 21”, 2017 ♦       Entrec Centre, Evergreen Park

Gold Sponsor

For inqu iries, please contact : Heidi Arbeau -Wood, Campaign/Development Officer

HArbeauWood@gprc .ab.ca       •    780T.P53D91.7280335038

Please note : The President’s Ball is a paperless ticket event; na actual event tickets will be issued . Yaur guests’ names will need ta be provided ta GPRC prior to the event day to be added to the guest list far ent ry. All sponsors will receive business receipts .

w

NEW: Add a STAR STUDENT to your sponsorship packag e!

GPRC offers our sponsors the opportunity to introduce  the community to  some of our finest stars : our st udents. Your sponsorship will give select star students the chance to attend a private student reception

before the Ball ; reserved seating at the event with a table of peers; and a picture and brief biography of their achievements featured at the event .

Add a “Star Student” to your sponsorship package for $500

Together , let’s fill the night with GPRC’s brightest STARS!

M

For inquiries, please contact : Heidi Arbeau -Wood, Campaign/ Development Officer

HArbeauWood@gprc.ab .ca      •     780T.P53D91.2780335038

Issue Summary Report

6.4.  Sponsorship Request – GPRC Presidents Ball

#20170216004

Meeting : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Type : Recreation Advisory Committee

Meeting Date : 2017/03/16 10:00

Executive Summary                                                                                                                                                                  

Request for sponsorship. GPRC is seeking a three year commitment from the County (see attached letter).

Background                                                                                                                                                                  

Event info:

Saturday, October 21, 2017 Entrec Centre

Sponsorship Opportunities:

Platinum – $7,500 Gold – $5,000

Photo booth – $5,000 Table wine – $5,000

Champagne Reception – $5,000 Silver – $3,500

Sweet treats – $3,500 Bronze – $2,000 Friend – $1,500

GIK, prize or auction item.

Past Support:

This event has not been sponsored from community assistance in the past.

Community Assistance:

There is $37,560 remaining in the 2017 Community Assistance budget.

Alternatives                                                                                                                                                                  

1  – Commit to sponsoring the event for three years. Recommend Council add GPRC Presidents Ball to the ‘Grants Approved on an Annual Basis’ under Community Assistance for three years. RAC select the sponsorship level.

2  – Sponsor GPRC Presidents Ball for one year.

3  – Purchase tickets from Council’s initiatives budget. 4 – No action.

Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                  

As RAC directs.

Ms. Shannon Baird County of Grande Prairie 10001 84 Ave.

Clair mont, AB TOH 0W0

December 14, 2016

County of

Grande p r_..,.·-:·

DEC 2 9 2016

50YEARS

OF STUDENT SUCCESS

Dear Shannon,

Thank you for making 2016 a truly successful event year for Grande Prai rie Regional College!

We are presenting our 2016 College Classic sponsors an exclusive opportun ity to renew or upgrade your sponsorship of this wonderful event for up to the next three years. This past year, you supported GPRC through shared Bronze sponsorship of the College Class ic, and we would be thrilled to welcome you as a t hree-year sponsor at this level. We would also be happy to  speak  with you about  other opportunities  for this event  and the President ‘s Ball , enclosed for your co nsiderati on.

The 2016 -17 academic year marks an important milestone in the history of our College, and we invite you to  share in the celebrations in a significant way. As we celebrate 50 years through various events and activities , we would be very pleased to have the County of Grande Prairie join us with a mult i-year commitment to one of our most significant annual fundraising endeavours.

GPRC has been committed to serving the vital needs of post -seco ndary access and opportunity in the Northern Alberta region for five decades, and we look forward to the next five… and beyond. Please join us as  we  continue to support our students, our College, our industry, and our region.

With warmest holiday wishes,

Heidi                o d

Campaign/Development Officer 780-539-2835

harbeauwood@gprc.ab.ca

Cari Foster

Sr. Ma nager , Events Services 780-539-2902

cfoster@gprc.ab.ca

PRC

2017 College Classic

FLETCHER

COLLEGE CLASSIC

Presented By

MUDRYK

& CD. LIi

CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS

Friday, June 2nd, 2017

Sponsorship Opportunities