What really happened during ITU?

[southy]

I was looking at Penticton Council highlights today and the first item that caught my eye was about the ITU event this summer.

http://www.penticton.ca/EN/meta/city-ne ... ights.html

This item right here:
In-Kind expenditures reallocated
Council approved re-allocation of unused in-kind grant expenditures for Challenge Penticton to the ITU Festival and directed staff to incorporate learnings from the ITU Festival into future major events including the 2018 Super League Triathlon.

Normally I would have just let this go, however, something is missing here. Coucnil approves to re-allocate unused in-kind grant expenditures (we're not sure how much) that were given to Challenge Penticton and are now going to give said amount to the ITU Festival (which has come and gone) and have directed staff to incorporate learnings from the ITU Festival into future major events including the 2018 Super League Triathlon. I'm really not sure where that in-kind money which was moved from Challenge Penticton to the ITU Festival which ceases to exist in Penticton really ended up and why?

Also, as time goes on since ITU said goodbye, I keep hearing horror stories from business owners who were/are not thrilled at all with ITU Management, the Mayor and Council. I do believe this is another one of those ... ahh, well everyone really isn't being transparent with regard to what happened situations. What I would like to know is did the City in any way offer financial aid or actually pay cash dollars to any specific business that might have been affected negatively by the ITU?

[southy]

Another interesting story dealing with this on Castanet: https://www.castanet.net/news/Penticton ... -ITU-races

[XT225]

Another interesting story dealing with this on Castanet: https://www.castanet.net/news/Penticton ... -ITU-races

Notice who abstained in the vote. Fence sitting for those who think they might have a chance of re-election has begun!

With Mayor Andrew Jakubeit and Coun. Andre Martin abstaining, council unanimously agreed to pay out the final funds.

[twobits]

In kind is just what it means. So much has been budgeted. If the amount turns out to be less than required, those unused funds should be returned to general revenues. If the amount used exceeds the amount budgeted......someone better be able to explain why and justify it.

[fluffy]

Notice who abstained in the vote.

Wouldn't members active in the business community be expected to abstain from voting rather than risk conflict of interest accusations?

[southy]

Fluffy I wish it was that black and white. Nice and necessary gesture on their part, however, where does this non involvement begin and end? If there is a conflict in voting would there not also be a conflict when dealing with public issues of said event? Yes there is more, a lot more to this story. In time I'm sure it will come out.

[fluffy]

Yes there is more, a lot more to this story.

Perhaps, if it is in one's nature to assume such. On the other hand it could simply be a bookkeeping thing. They had some $$$ left over from one event, and came up a little short on another, similar event. Makes sense to me to "pay the bill" with money essentially ear-marked for the same purpose.

But then again I'm the first to admit that I'm a little naive in that I like to think that most people are basically good. It wouldn't be the first time that that kind of trust has put me in trouble, but I don't really care for a lifestyle that assumes the worst in folks.

[XT225]

Wouldn't members active in the business community be expected to abstain from voting rather than risk conflict of interest accusations?

Any member of council who had any chance of a conflict of interest should not be abstaining but rather excusing themselves and leave the room! That's normally how things are done. I believe it shows a lack of Leadership qualities by simply abstaining. I prefer to have Decisive members on council.

ETA: In fairness though, I actually doubt that neither Jack or Martin (who abstained) have had any associations with the ITU (and anything to gain by such) or else they would not have been in the council chambers when discussions around the ITU were taking place.

[twobits]

Council heard Tuesday the ITU event in August went $22,000 over budget on in-kind support from the city, due mainly to higher than expected participation and catering costs.

Challenge Penticton, however, was more than $15,000 under budget.

Across both events, the organizers were about $7,400 over budget. With a $10,000 ITU payment still due from the city, a total of $2,600 was paid to the event.

Some members of council expressing confusion over how funds can so easily be transfer were justified in that confusion. They were two separate races with two separate in kind budgets. One over and one under for a net deficit of 7400. So with an ITU payment of 10k still due.....they paid out in cash, not in lieu service, 2600 to satisfy the 10k payment. This solution only existed because the races were operated by the same organization.
Now here is the important part to consider. If the races were not organized by the same people.....would ITU have been billed 12k (22k less the 10k payment still due) and challenge refunded 15k.
Same net result for the City but why should there be a refund of unused in kind services. IMO, these two budgets should be completely separate as if they were different operators cuz they were different events with different budgets. ITU should have been billed 12k (22 less 10k still owing) and taxpayers should have kept the 15k of in kind budget that was not used.
This accountability and loosy goosy stuff is just crap with a response to the taxpayer that in the future this will be more accurately addressed.

[southy]

This is it exactly Twobits. But the part no one at city hall wants to address is was any money paid or promised either via cash or tax incentives to disgruntled business owners? Did the Mayor and or council or administration speak directly to disgruntled business owners and suggest that everything would be taken care of? Sorry ... something tells me once again there is more to the rest of the story.

[twobits]

This is it exactly Twobits. But the part no one at city hall wants to address is was any money paid or promised either via cash or tax incentives to disgruntled business owners? Did the Mayor and or council or administration speak directly to disgruntled business owners and suggest that everything would be taken care of? Sorry ... something tells me once again there is more to the rest of the story.

There is no more rest of the story here. It was just poor management and contracts. What is sad about it is that it is just being sloughed off as a learning experience for the future. Personally, I am getting rather tired of all the learning experiences we are expected to pay for. I won't even bother making a list of them.