FranÁais Join/Renew Search Contact Us Log In
Domagoj Juretic - Wed, Jul 29 2009 07:55 am

Provided that the WCSC and BCHPA participate financially, do you approve of HPAC funding the development project as presented by Mr. Nigel Protter in the amount of $3500?

Nigel Protter

Attached is the application package content submitted last night before deadline to the National Trails Coalition, asking for $117,500 in Federal Grant funding for local trails.

As you may know, this large and complex opportunity just came to my attention late last week, so it has been a bit of a wild ride. This is the first project I've completed since being professionally engaged as the Executive Director of the Pemberton Valley Trails Association, again only last week. There wasn't much time for proof-reading and word-smithing. In the project description I had to make a few minor leaps of faith and I possibly applied some overly florid prose, lapses which I hope you will forgive. I certainty do think this is a credible and executable proposal in any case.

Thank you all for your unparalleled support and encouragement throughout this marathon week as we sought and got your input and support in record time. I have never heard of a significant consensus-based land-use proposal succeeding unanimously in BC in such a short time, it must be a world record. I think the self-evident nature and value of the project, and the one-time opportunity to access substantial new Federal money helped us all to focus on the immutable deadline.

However, we have several tough milestones to pass before we can celebrate and think about actual construction:

  1. We must be selected as a supported project by the selection committee of the NTC. They may grant all, some, or none of the money we have requested.
  2. Our matching fund partners must be finally convinced and empowered by their various boards and committees to divert a significant portion of their scarce public and private funds to this project, and get their cheques issued and signed over the next two to three weeks. Please make cheques payable to the PVTA.
  3. We must firm up our volunteer labour, material and service commitments.
  4. We must hope that your letters of support can be backed-up, where required, by affirmative resolutions from your various governance bodies.

If we get through all of the above, then we'll be left with just the "good problem" of how to best finalize the routes and design, and build and manage the trails.

I will keep you posted.

Nigel Protter
Executive Director
Pemberton Valley Trails Association
604-894-0116

Voting:

Provided that the WCSC and BCHPA participate financially, do you approve of HPAC funding the development project as presented by Mr. Nigel Protter in the amount of $3500?

  • Yes (4)
    • 2009-07-29 09:36:50 Steven Younger - Ontario
    • 2009-07-29 11:40:46 Amir Izadi - British Columbia & Yukon
    • 2009-07-29 21:50:36 Bruce Busby - Alberta & NWT
    • 2009-07-30 17:38:33 Domagoj Juretic - Quebec
  • No (0)
  • Abstain (0)
  • Did Not Vote (3):
    • Loren White - Saskatchewan
    • Gilles Normandeau - Manitoba & Nunavut
    • Michael Fuller - Atlantic Canada
Resolution:

Approved.

Reference: Board of Directors forum & related discussion.

Domagoj Juretic - Wed, Jul 29 2009 07:55 am

Motion 2009-07-28 was duly passed by a vote from a majority of directors(4). 3 directors didnít participate in the vote, probably for good reasons which exclude protest. It was important to put this motion to vote now because time was really of the essence even though this is a period when some directors might be taking some well deserved time off.

This financial commitment will definitely affect the budget and other commitments made for this coming year.

Since we do have a volatile situation involving another major flying site we might have other budgetary impacts in the coming weeks. As soon as we see a little more clearly through both these urgent situation we (BOD) will have to sit down with our BM and reassess our budgetary situation.

In the meantime, this motion authorizes our vice-president to announce our commitment to Mr. Protter (who is going to head this project). Our vice-president will keep us informed on the progress of this project.

Domagoj Juretic
HPAC President


Discussion prior to voting

Amir Izadi
Pemberton Launch †† † Fri, Jul 03 2009 02:57 pm
Gentlemen,

Attached is the grant proposal from Pemberton Valley Trails Association to obtain federal funding to build an extensive network of trails in the mountains of Pemberton, BC. Included in this proposal is the development of a new hang glider and paraglider launch.

For those of you not aware of Pemberton, it is truly one of the best flying sites in all of Canada. Just 30 minutes north of Whistler, it's a beautiful and easily accessible flying site with a tenured launch and CYA and many landing options.

I received an email from Nigel Protter the executive director of PVTA literally at the 11th hour requesting a letter of support and some sort of financial commitment. I contacted Dom and together made and executive decision to give him our support but to hold off on the financial commitment until approval by the board. (see mky letter at end of the .pdf document).

I believe these opportunities are truly once in a lifetime and HPAC should strongly support this and discuss our financial contribution. The WCSC as well as the BCHPA are also contributing around $4000-$5000 each. I believe we should do the same.

I can liason with NIgel and give the board periodic updates.

Thanks for your attention.

Best,
Amir

Nigel Protter by email wrote:
Dear All,

Attached is the application package content submitted last night before deadline to the National Trails Coalition, asking for $117,500 in Federal Grant funding for local trails.

As you may know, this large and complex opportunity just came to my attention late last week, so it has been a bit of a wild ride. This is the first project I've completed since being professionally engaged as the Executive Director of the Pemberton Valley Trails Association, again only last week. There wasn't much time for proof-reading and word-smithing. In the project description I had to make a few minor leaps of faith and I possibly applied some overly florid prose, lapses which I hope you will forgive. I certainty do think this is a credible and executable proposal in any case.

Thank you all for your unparalleled support and encouragement throughout this marathon week as we sought and got your input and support in record time. I have never heard of a significant consensus-based land-use proposal succeeding unanimously in BC in such a short time, it must be a world record. I think the self-evident nature and value of the project, and the one-time opportunity to access substantial new Federal money helped us all to focus on the immutable deadline.

However, we have several tough milestones to pass before we can celebrate and think about actual construction:

1/ We must be selected as a supported project by the selection committee of the NTC. They may grant all, some, or none of the money we have requested.

2/ Our matching fund partners must be finally convinced and empowered by their various boards and committees to divert a significant portion of their scarce public and private funds to this project, and get their cheques issued and signed over the next two to three weeks. Please make cheques payable to the PVTA.

3/ We must firm up our volunteer labour, material and service commitments.

4/ We must hope that your letters of support can be backed-up, where required, by affirmative resolutions from your various governance bodies.

If we get through all of the above, then we'll be left with just the "good problem" of how to best finalize the routes and design, and build and manage the trails.

I will keep you posted.

All the best,

Nigel Protter
Executive Director
Pemberton Valley Trails Association
604-894-0116


Gilles by email wrote:
I think we can endorse the project but I don't think the HPAC should be making any financial commitments for any flying sites. I don't believe that our mandate includes acquiring flying sites or funding such acquisitions. We can encourage support and even ask pilots who fly in these areas to make some financial contribution. Perhaps a fund raising drive sponsored by the HPAC would be more appropriate.

Just a few thoughts...


Michael Fuller by email wrote:
I would be in full agreement with Gilles.
However the hpac role should enable the local club or the bchpa the ability to raise funds by offering donors a charitable tax receipt through the hpac. The funds would then be funnelled from the hpac to the appropriate recipient. It is a role that I have strongly recommended and tried to implement for the last eight years. I would like to see this happen. This would enable us to act for our members in a very proactive way!
Sam what is our current status with revenue Canada?
cheers
Michael


Gerry Grossnegger by email wrote:
I think there is some precedent in HPAC providing funds for site development & maintenance. Usually matching the local organization's amount. That environmental study that was to keep a few BC sites open, for example.

We are "created to represent and support the sports of hang gliding and paragliding in Canada" and opening new sites sounds like great support to me.

We also "Support the preservation and acquisition of flying sites in Canada".


Amir Izadi by email wrote:
Hi guys

I will put this up for debate certainly on the forum.

If you have look at the proposal you will see that it is truly a once in a lifetime opportunity. The extensive network of hiking trails in conjunction with a worldclass launch at a worldclass site with a unique micro-climate will do tremendous amount for the promotion of our sport and put it on the map internationally. In nearly every respect it rivals Golden as world-class flying site.

Currently the ONLY thing wrong with pemberton is the launch which is both too low (below the inversion in the summer) and in the lee about 50% of the time. So this would solve both problems.

I believe its in the best interest of pilots for HPAC to support precisely these kinds of projects. They are not simply local issues. The scope and magnitude have truly national benefits. And please keep in mind that local pilots are not asking for simple handouts. We are still funding roughly 2/3 of $10-12,000 requirement. If we can afford to spend $10,000/year on AIR which the majority of BC pilots do not support, I believe HPAC can contribute ~$4000 to this very substantial once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

Amir
Steven Younger
Fri, Jul 03 2009 05:35 pm
This does sound good , a letter of support is a no brainer. A donation may be a good idea ? There is some precedent in HPAC providing funds but is there precedent that parallels this one.
This type of thing is certainly fits our mission , but are there any rules for this sort of thing . I am sure there are other sites across the country that could use help as well and it may be a good idea to have some rules in place incase this becomes a trend.

Steve
Amir Izadi
Tue, Jul 21 2009 01:39 am
So Nigel has secured $70,000 from the Feds for this project. Which means, he now has to collect the matching funds from the various parties. He needs this by the end of July.

The cost of the HG/PG launch is now estimated at around ~40-$50,000. However, he is only requesting $20,000. Which means we are getting an incredible deal.
$10,000 will come from the Feds and the other $10,000 from the HG/PG community. The west coast soaring club and BCHPA will be putting in around $3500 each.
So HPAC I believe should contribute the same ~$3500.

What do you guys say? Can I get your input and then put it to a vote?

Amir
Bruce Busby
Thu, Jul 23 2009 01:51 am
I sopke with Mike (Sudan?) and Jim Orava last week about this. Mike has hiked in and thinks the results aren't readily apparent (might be an expensive hole in the trees.
Jim Orava was considerably more optimistic and thinks that this could be 'Annecy North America'. He also seems to think the HG would be thrilled since this site would likely afford a better launch position (and an earlier start to the day).

My vote is we fund this initiative for up to $5000

And yes I think the HPAC should back these types of initiatives with $ and stated support.

Bruce
Michael Fuller
Thu, Jul 23 2009 02:46 pm
This sounds like a great idea to me. I've gotta ask though what part of the budget this is coming from since all of our forecast revenue is aligned for predetermined expense.
This is the kind of info that we need in April. Perhaps our committees and the general membership should be made aware in late winter that these types of initiatives are great but if they see something in the future they should give us a heads up or there might not be money. In this case that would be too bad. Perhaps Sam should be asked to examine the budget and recommend where it might come from.

I'd agree with Amir that we equal the local contribution of $3,500 if we can find that amount.

I'd also like to reinforce the need to get the charitable up and running. This is a golden opportunity to offer tax receipts to private donors to the cause. A very positive way we can help!
Sam??

cheers
Michael
Steven Younger
Thu, Jul 23 2009 10:58 pm
I think Micheals idea with the charitable donations is much more in line with what we can afford. I am also worried that we are setting a standard that we may not be able to afford if other groups realize that Hpac is giving out cash for site upgrades. I believe the cause is good but without some rules for this kind of thing or a statement that this is a one time thing we may be asking for trouble.
This year Soga opened a new tow site and spent several thousand on site upgrades with no grants or assistance with lots more to go should they be asking for assistanse as well?
There is some interest in getting a site at Blue mountain opened the road in will need work ?These are only two sites one province, I am sure there are a lot more across the country.What would we say to them.If there are special reasons for picking one and not the other then they should be made into rules and standards for this kind of funding.
Again I do believe that this cause is good but not sure how it can be implemented fairly.

Steve
Domagoj Juretic
Fri, Jul 24 2009 10:12 am
Our Mission Statement PRD might prove that this initiative is inline with our goals.

Dom


Date of Issue: April 8 2003

Purpose of this Policy and Regulatory Directive

This purpose of this Policy and Regulatory Directive (PRD) is to state the vision, mission and goals of the HPAC/ACVL.
Vision

The Vision of the HPAC/ACVL is a vibrant community of hang gliding and paragliding pilots safely practising the sport on a wide selection of first-class flying sites across Canada, now and well into the future.
Mission

The mission of the HPAC/ACVL is to provide its members with those services of a national nature that enable and facilitate their safe participation in hang gliding and paragliding in Canada.
Goals

The goals of the HPAC/ACVL, in order of priority based on the responses of the HPAC/ACVL member survey conducted in 2002, are to:
Provide a national insurance program;
Monitor and promote the safety of hang gliding and paragliding in Canada;
Promote the growth of hang gliding and paragliding in Canada and maintain a viable population of active pilots;
Support the preservation and acquisition of flying sites in Canada;
Represent the interest of hang gliding and paragliding pilots at Transport Canada;
Develop and manage a Canadian pilot rating program to help standardize pilot skills in Canada;
Promote a hang gliding and paragliding instructor formation program;
Manage a national competition program to select a Canadian hang gliding and Canadian paragliding champion;
Represent the interest of Canadian hang gliding and paragliding pilots internationally.
Domagoj Juretic
Fri, Jul 24 2009 10:18 am
I have flown in Pemberton and I can easily visualize the added value of this higher and wider launch.
Having spent the week with two pilots of the Pemberton Flying Monkeys (Jim Orava and Mike Sadan) has also convinced me that this is going to be money well spent. The multiplicator effect will play a great role here ensuring that our $3500 participation will have get us a lot for our investment.

Sam should provide us soon with budget info.

Dom
Steven Younger
Fri, Jul 24 2009 10:46 am
Support the preservation and acquisition of flying sites in Canada;
Because this is an exsisting site and will be there with or with out this upgrade I don't think it fits. However if the launch is being upgraded and will be safer or lower the rating needed to fly there, then it might fit under the statement
: The mission of the HPAC/ACVL is to provide its members with those services of a national nature that enable and facilitate their safe participation in hang gliding and paragliding in Canada.

Steve
Gilles Normandeau
Fri, Jul 24 2009 11:21 am
I still think that support is one thing and direct funding site acquisition is another. Support of the Pemberton proposal is a great idea, but we should make an effort to raising the funds necessary instead of just doling them out without any rules to follow. Steve is right to be cautious, because we can't afford to fund every proposal that comes along. Perhaps we need to ask interested members to form a fund raising group to solicit funds from pilots from across Canada. We could establish a site development fund for these sorts of situations and dole out the funds based on some predetermined criteria.

I realize that we haven't any structure in place yet, but we should look in to it. In the meantime, we could put the funds forward as a type of loan that will need to be paid back through fund raising efforts. Does that make any sense?
Michael Fuller
Fri, Jul 24 2009 03:52 pm
If nothing else we are becoming very aware that we do not have any policy in place to guide us here

We have no budget allocation. In fact we're proposing to finance the website development by borrowing from our reserves ( paying for this investment over two years) because we do not have the projected revenue to cover this in one year.

Our very effective role in this should be to EFFECTIVELY facilitate the raising for funds from all of our sectors and from the general public. This can be done best through our charitable status .. (nudge)

We have a great launch here in the east that needs a road put into it to make it more readily accessible to hg however we don't have the funds..

I think that the development of an Annecy North America ( hyperbole accepted) is a wonderful, fabulous idea, I want to fly it. I would even help work on a pitch campaign to our members. What a great feather in our cap. However it would also be a great feather in the cap of the Pemberton area board of trade to have this world class site. Are they involved?

In the end I need to know about the money and how we justify exclusivity to the rest of the regions.

not meaning to be a grinch.

Michael
Domagoj Juretic
Sat, Jul 25 2009 11:17 am
Yes, Michael your answer makes perfect sense and this is fine when time is not of the essence. But in this case we would be like reacting like the board of GM or worse a huge government department. Guys, your prudence his commendable as prudence always should be. But I strongly believe that it will make us miss the boat called ''Opportunity''.

This project is of course doable by charitable donations and untapped sources of funds. But the multiplicator effect of our $3500 investment might not be present in a future sailing of this boat. There are two elements which stand out for me here: opportunity and deadline.
I don't think that the GM or big government model apply well here. I personally try to view this as an entrepreneur and the bang for the buck we can get by acting now.

Our sites are really our Achille's Heel as proven by the case in my province. And that is the reason why this action would be in line with one of our stated goals.

Dom
Michael Fuller
Sat, Jul 25 2009 11:28 am
Dom
Where do we get the money?
Bruce Busby
Sat, Jul 25 2009 08:45 pm
I'm not going to be flippant enough to say who cares where we get the $; Iíll just say that given the time critical nature of this investment, let's decide where the $ comes from at a later date (e.g. we delay one phase of the website re-do that is currently budgeted and approved in principal).
Jim was telling me that this Govt backed initiative must be started and ended in a single season. No carry-overs, what doesn't get done now will not get done, ever, at least not with Govt cash!
Let's get off the fence and focus on one of our core priorities... i.e. places to fly!
Govt $ has plenty of strings and we'll likely never have the time and $ to make a $3500 investment look like $70,000 again.
You all know me as a pretty dyed-in-the wool fiscal conservative. This is a no-brainer great idea to develop a site, have it opened and pioneered and perhaps shown off to the world when the 2010 Olympic Games invade BC next winter.
For once letís suckle the public tit for our gain!

Bruce
Domagoj Juretic
Mon, Jul 27 2009 10:14 am
Yes, I agree this should even take precedence on our website overhaul project if need be.
Amir is working with Sam to figure out where this money will come from.

We might need to vote on an budget amendment on top of the funding vote??
We'll see.

Please get ready to cast your votes quickly. The deadline is this week so the voting window will be very short.

Dom
Sam Jeyes
Tue, Jul 28 2009 09:17 am
All Directors please follow this link to our 2009-2010 budget:

PID 281

We are predicting a surplus of $2011 on the balance sheet for 2009-2010. To find $3500 this year would mean scrapping other projects that have already been approved.
My suggestion would be to split the funding over a 2 year period. So we budget $1750 this year and take this from the $2011 surplus and budget $1750 into the 2010-2011 budget. We would be able to cut two cheques. One immediately and one on April 1st 2010 which would be in the next fiscal year.
Any other suggestions are welcome but that would be my initial recommendation.
Regards
SAM

PS.
Charitable funding is frustatingly slow as I put the application in over 5 months ago. I will draft a letter from Dom to try and get some answers on this.
SAM
Amir Izadi
Tue, Jul 28 2009 01:24 pm
As I've said guys, opportunities like this are once-in-a-life time.
We are getting a $50,000 launch because the head of the Pemberton Valley's trails association also happens to be a PG pilot and the financial crisis provided a fiscal stimulus package by the Feds that won't happen again.

Bruce is right in saying, it doesn't matter right now. Let's get behind the project. The community of Pemberton is behind this, the local pilots are behind this to the tune of $7000 ($3500 each from the WCSC and BCHPA). Why are we dragging our feet I wonder?

A few points I should bring to your attention.

1. BC pilots make up the bulk of HPAC members and hence revenues. While this is project is of national significance and a benefit to the community as a whole, how am I going to explain to BC pilots that the HPAC board isn't sure they have the money for such a once-in-a-life time opportunity?
2. I have told this board on numerous occasions that the nearly $20,000 spent EVERY year on AIR and the ADM is not supported by the bulk of BC pilots. This is something I have to explain to my constituents time and time again. Why is it that we have no qualms about spending members' money on outdated and insignificant things, but have to wrangle our hands when it comes to creating a world class site in Canada?

I suggest the money come from where Sam suggested. In two parts. Although Nigel needs this money now, I'm sure Sam can figure out a way to get it to him and then take it from next years budget where needs be.

Amir
Domagoj Juretic
Wed, Jul 29 2009 08:14 am
Budgets are not Bibles nor can they really foretell what can come up in the following year.
Life is like a good baseball pitcher, it can shoot straightforward rockets but it has other munitions in its armament.
We just got a couple of curve balls thrown at us involving flying sites.
This is really getting down to our core mission anyway.

Wouldn't life be boring if we could always predict and plan for what comes next?

Dom
P.s. We will have to reset some priorities budget wise no doubt.
Steven Younger
Wed, Jul 29 2009 09:13 am
The cause is good and I have voted appropriately.
However I am not comfortable with how big and bad one particular region is as having any say in decisions of a national nature.
I think perhaps a little education by Amir to BC pilots as to the national nature of our organization. Pilots of all regions are receiving what they pay for : membership, insurance,communication with the rest of the country,and support when needed(as I am sure will be proven by this vote).
So perhaps we can put away this argument away and start dealing with things solely on there importance and impact rather than political relevance.

Steve
Domagoj Juretic
Wed, Jul 29 2009 11:51 am
The cause stands on its merit and it would wherever it stemmed from.
I really believe that our members will be supportive whatever there region of residence.

If political in any way, the causes of site preservation and development (and we have one of each on the table) are great rallying causes on the national level. This is all good in my book.

I was priviledged to fly in Pemberton and know that our investment will probably turn this great flying site in an awesome one for a relatively small national investment on our part. It will probably become a flagship site which will attracts pilots from all over Canada.

In the case Mt Ste-Anne, I was a membre of that club many years and understand how crucial it is to my province and how important it is nationally speaking. If we succeed in preserving this flying site, the rest of the country will have to deal with a large group of eternally grateful pilots.....grateful for all of the national help they are getting.

Yes, I would say that these causes are important....nationally speaking.

Dom Smile
P.s. Surprising to hear the guy from Quebec speak so "nationally'', hey?
Amir Izadi
Wed, Jul 29 2009 04:43 pm
Thanks for your support guys.

I didn't mean to turn this into a political debate. I just wanted to convey to you what I'm up against here in BC where the view of HPAC by the majority of pilots is that it's a bloated bureaucracy that doesn't serve their needs other than the liability insurance which they feel can be had for half the cost of current membership fees. Hopefully this vote will show them that HPAC does have other purposes.

With respect to this Pemberton project, I would simply like to say that it really is unique and not simply a need by local pilots to improve their launch. We have a ton of such projects here in BC and they are funded by the BCHPA and local clubs. No one has ever approached HPAC for maintenance, improvement or expansion of their local sites.

What makes this project unique is twofold: first, the scale of it is quite grand. We are talking about a European style launch that will enable us to host international events. Moreover, there is already matching funds from the Feds, the local community, and BC pilots. Second, it does have national significance because the site is world-class and will attract pilots from across Canada as well as the US and the rest of the world. Like Golden, it has the potential to put us on the map internationally. And because it's close to a major metropolitan centre (Vancouver) and a huge tourist destination (Whistler) our public exposure and media interest will increase significantly. That should help promote the image of the sport.

Once again I do appreciate your support in this respect.

Amir
Aug 1 2013   Top Top