In our quest to keep the public informed we decided it would be a good idea to see how much 'Conservation' costs the Citizen's of Ontario. Thinking that in this day and age with all of the government buzz words like transparency and accountability, it should be a straight forward task of just asking the overseer's for the financial data on their group. That didn't exactly work out for us. The financial information was not available. If you are lucky enough to find it on the various websites, the data just simply does not match the pretty annual reports that are put out. We decided to just go straight for the truth and pulled all of the annual tax returns that are filed with the Canada Revenue Agency. The facts and figures are staggering.
Conservation Authority Board of Directors
Dick Hibma Grey Sauble CA
Mark Burnham Mississippi Valley CA
Lin Gibson Conservation Sudbury CA
Sally Martyn Catfish Creek CA
Wayne Wilson Nottawasage Valley CA
Cliff Evanitski Long Point Region CA
These are the 6 people responsible for overseeing assets of over $1-Billion for the people of Ontario.
Government Funding has increased by $5,621,110 over the last 4 years.
Expenses have increased by $26,033,495 over 4 years with most of that being Compensation @ $18,832,033. Conservation Ontario has created 140 Full Time jobs and 573 part time jobs during those 4 years.
$17,306,287 has been cut from the charitable programs from 2009-2012. Reduced services to Citizen's to make up for bloated Compensation.
Conservation Ontario
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Assets | $935,580,346 | $997,995,945 | $1,022,372,093 | $1,081,248,257 | |
| Revenues | Total | ||||
| Donations (with Receipt) | $2,111,633 | $1,202,334 | $3,042,481 | $1,356,044 | $7,712,492 |
| Federal Government | $5,770,626 | $10,183,518 | $6,984,005 | $5,048,236 | $27,986,385 |
| Provincial Government | $44,188,472 | $46,954,038 | $34,932,720 | $34,919,701 | $160,994,931 |
| Municipal Government | $102,792,211 | $108,928,126 | $114,132,423 | $118,404,482 | $444,257,242 |
| Sales of Goods and Services | $60,120,172 | $72,289,898 | $71,098,012 | $81,708,270 | $285,216,352 |
| Fundraising (Non tax receipted) | $340,069 | $104,757 | $136,551 | $360,418 | $941,795 |
| Other Revenue | $22,307,134 | $16,444,008 | $19,386,357 | $15,732,038 | $73,869,537 |
| % Revenue from Donations | 1% | 0% | 1% | 0% | |
| % Revenue from Sales | 24% | 26% | 26% | 30% | |
| % Revenue from Fundraising | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | |
| % of Revenue from Governments | 61% | 60% | 58% | 58% | |
| Total Revenue | $252,360,789 | $274,499,941 | $268,877,293 | $273,650,258 | $1,069,388,281 |
| Expenses | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occupancy Costs | $10,516,014 | $10,636,530 | $11,368,477 | $11,487,292 | $44,008,313 |
| Compensation | $117,827,279 | $123,071,874 | $130,156,677 | $136,659,312 | $507,715,142 |
| Charitable Programs | $98,470,736 | $105,599,026 | $93,705,099 | $81,164,449 | $378,939,310 |
| Management and Administration | $25,892,266 | $28,153,641 | $33,601,902 | $40,598,999 | $128,246,808 |
| Consulting and Professional Fees | $6,111,922 | $10,171,488 | $6,862,438 | $6,215,997 | $29,361,845 |
| Number of Full-time Employees | 2,073 | 2,129 | 2,169 | 2,213 | UP 140 |
| Full-time Compensation | $91,937,393 | $96,564,724 | $102,466,634 | $100,381,139 | $391,349,890 |
| Number of Part-time Employees | 2,557 | 3,042 | 3,039 | 3,130 | UP 573 |
| Part-time Compensation | $23,994,820 | $25,583,697 | $26,355,046 | $28,494,700 | $104,428,263 |
| Total Expenditures | $227,438,057 | $240,339,709 | $239,753,631 | $253,471,552 | $961,002,949 |
Best at Raising Funds
This is a good category as these Conservation Authority's actually fund raise to try and offset their costs. Most CA's have corresponding Foundations that donate funds to them. As more CA's turn to the public teat for their source of income, working for donations and fund raising must be frowned upon.
The below list is the best of the CA's at working for donations.
| CA Name | Donations/Fundraising | Total Revenue | Donations % |
|---|---|---|---|
| LOWER THAMES VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $62,355 | $296,973 | 21.00% |
| Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority | $495,876 | $4,418,081 | 11.22% |
| UPPER THAMES RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $12,850 | $116,140 | 11.06% |
| CATFISH CREEK CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $86,125 | $1,221,186 | 7.05% |
| GANARASKA REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $192,843 | $3,061,430 | 6.30% |
| HAMILTON REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $796,780 | $13,292,196 | 5.99% |
| RIDEAU VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $487,141 | $8,439,705 | 5.77% |
| NICKEL DISTRICT CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $92,485 | $1,686,690 | 5.48% |
| KETTLE CREEK CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $73,616 | $1,859,571 | 3.96% |
| ESSEX REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $250,910 | $7,673,117 | 3.27% |
Most Federal Government Funding (%) - 2012
These are the CA's that are the largest Federal Teat Suckers. Not sure as to the how or why these are all funded differently.
| CA Name | Federal | % | Revenue |
|---|---|---|---|
| LOWER TRENT REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $501,068 | 15.55% | $3,221,669 |
| ST. CLAIR REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $733,484 | 14.67% | $4,998,880 |
| SOUTH NATION RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $538,090 | 8.71% | $6,179,507 |
| ESSEX REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $569,083 | 7.42% | $7,673,117 |
| LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $507,255 | 4.08% | $12,442,530 |
| RAISIN REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $81,940 | 3.61% | $2,270,534 |
| CATFISH CREEK CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $38,969 | 3.19% | $1,221,186 |
| SAUGEEN VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $106,895 | 2.56% | $4,170,532 |
| NIAGARA PENINSULA CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $255,578 | 2.09% | $12,254,930 |
| KETTLE CREEK CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $35,182 | 1.89% | $1,859,571 |
Most Provincial Government Funding (%) - 2012
These are the CA's that are the largest Provincial Teat Suckers. Not sure as to the how or why these are all funded differently.
| CA Name | Provincial | % | Revenue |
|---|---|---|---|
| LOWER TRENT REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $1,820,980 | 56.52% | $3,221,669 |
| SAULT STE. MARIE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $490,998 | 54.81% | $895,754 |
| THE NORTH BAY-MATTAWA CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $1,747,872 | 42.48% | $4,114,592 |
| LAKEHEAD REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $1,108,696 | 39.74% | $2,790,180 |
| NICKEL DISTRICT CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $630,544 | 37.38% | $1,686,690 |
| CROWE VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $280,652 | 36.98% | $758,984 |
| RAISIN REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $742,028 | 32.68% | $2,270,534 |
| SAUGEEN VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $1,150,110 | 27.58% | $4,170,532 |
| LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $3,425,062 | 27.53% | $12,442,530 |
| QUINTE CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION | $961,015 | 23.91% | $4,019,497 |
Most Municipal Government Funding (%) - 2012
These are the CA's that are the largest Municipal Teat Suckers. The Board of Directors of these CA's are elected officials. You may want to reconsider who you vote for next time around. They have mastered begging at a Municipal level.
| CA Name | Municipal | % | Revenue |
|---|---|---|---|
| MISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $2,360,506 | 82.43% | $2,863,757 |
| KAWARTHA REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $2,066,298 | 76.09% | $2,715,421 |
| NIAGARA PENINSULA CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $7,441,925 | 60.73% | $12,254,930 |
| RIDEAU VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $5,115,112 | 60.61% | $8,439,705 |
| OTONABEE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $1,057,062 | 54.61% | $1,935,649 |
| THE CATARAQUI REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $2,095,943 | 53.51% | $3,916,907 |
| CENTRAL LAKE ONTARIO CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $3,505,000 | 51.32% | $6,829,230 |
| LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $6,363,497 | 51.14% | $12,442,530 |
| LOWER THAMES VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $150,586 | 50.71% | $296,973 |
| SOUTH NATION RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $3,055,422 | 49.44% | $6,179,507 |
Most Total Government Funding (%) - 2012
The undisputed champions of Government Teat suckling. Why would you want to have to earn your money by doing fund raising? The Top Ten Teat suckers of 2012.
| CA Name | All Govt. | % | Revenue |
|---|---|---|---|
| LOWER TRENT REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $3,064,786 | 95.13% | $3,221,669 |
| MISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $2,707,801 | 94.55% | $2,863,757 |
| SAULT STE. MARIE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $812,588 | 90.72% | $895,754 |
| LAKEHEAD REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $2,420,855 | 86.76% | $2,790,180 |
| CROWE VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $643,610 | 84.80% | $758,984 |
| LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $10,295,814 | 82.75% | $12,442,530 |
| KAWARTHA REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $2,146,440 | 79.05% | $2,715,421 |
| OTONABEE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $1,528,809 | 78.98% | $1,935,649 |
| SOUTH NATION RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $4,671,415 | 75.60% | $6,179,507 |
| NICKEL DISTRICT CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $1,259,326 | 74.66% | $1,686,690 |
Gifts from other Charities
See the bottom of the page for more information of these.
| CA Name | Gifts from other Charities | Total Revenue | % Of Revenue |
|---|---|---|---|
| THE TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY / OFFICE DE PROTECTION DE LA NATURE DE TORONTO | $1,926,527 | $96,563,457 | 2.00% |
| GRAND RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $819,647 | $29,350,520 | 2.79% |
| HAMILTON REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $796,780 | $13,292,196 | 5.99% |
| RIDEAU VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $487,141 | $8,439,705 | 5.77% |
| ESSEX REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $248,894 | $7,673,117 | 3.24% |
| LAKE SIMCOE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $236,382 | $12,442,530 | 1.90% |
| CENTRAL LAKE ONTARIO CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $115,000 | $6,829,230 | 1.68% |
| CATFISH CREEK CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $86,125 | $1,221,186 | 7.05% |
| MISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $71,786 | $2,863,757 | 2.51% |
| NICKEL DISTRICT CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $65,000 | $1,686,690 | 3.85% |
Highest % of Revenue spent on Programs
These Conservation Authorities spend the most money as compared to their revenues on the services that they offer. We think the first one is a mistake when they filed their return. Since there is no one to oversee them even the accounting practices are different at each club.
| CA Name | Programs | Revenues | % of Revenues |
|---|---|---|---|
| UPPER THAMES RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $116,140 | $116,140 | 100.00% |
| OTONABEE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $1,925,360 | $1,935,649 | 99.47% |
| ST. CLAIR REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $4,921,146 | $4,998,880 | 98.45% |
| RAISIN REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $2,158,258 | $2,270,534 | 95.06% |
| SAULT STE. MARIE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $845,039 | $895,754 | 94.34% |
| SAUGEEN VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $3,933,131 | $4,170,532 | 94.31% |
| LOWER TRENT REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $2,951,030 | $3,221,669 | 91.60% |
| ESSEX REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $7,001,953 | $7,673,117 | 91.25% |
| SOUTH NATION RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $5,245,335 | $6,179,507 | 84.88% |
| THE CATARAQUI REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $3,300,142 | $3,916,907 | 84.25% |
Highest % of Revenue spent on Compensation
This is the top ten list of the CA's that spend the most on Compensation. If you are looking for that high paying career start at the top of this list and work your way down. If your CA isn't on this list, a transfer maybe in order.
| CA Name | Compensation | Revenues | % of Revenues |
|---|---|---|---|
| MISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $2,003,627 | $2,863,757 | 69.97% |
| OTONABEE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $1,295,636 | $1,935,649 | 66.94% |
| KAWARTHA REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $1,794,239 | $2,715,421 | 66.08% |
| CROWE VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $484,698 | $758,984 | 63.86% |
| RAISIN REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $1,426,212 | $2,270,534 | 62.81% |
| Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority | $2,623,990 | $4,418,081 | 59.39% |
| SAULT STE. MARIE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $513,427 | $895,754 | 57.32% |
| LONG POINT REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $2,018,122 | $3,561,061 | 56.67% |
| HALTON REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $11,839,554 | $20,961,871 | 56.48% |
| SOUTH NATION RIVER CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $3,449,679 | $6,179,507 | 55.82% |
Highest % of Revenue spent on Occupancy Costs
For the most luxurious digs the tax payers can afford we offer the top ten list of the kings of the castles. Pimp My CA. Where is Robin Leach when you need him?
Norfolk County's very own Long Point Region Conservation Authority is number one on the list. They spend more for their office space than poor old Crowe Valley CA made in Revenue! No one else is even close, but with 4 Councilors from Norfolk on the Board and 2 other Councilors having spent many years on either the Board or as the GM who would put pressure on the LPRCA to bring spending in line? In all fairness LPRCA does have a whooping 21 full time employees that work out of this castle. Golden desks and phones for everyone.
| CA Name | Occupancy Costs | Revenues | % of Revenues |
|---|---|---|---|
| LONG POINT REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $807,581 | $3,561,061 | 22.68% |
| CROWE VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $100,972 | $758,984 | 13.30% |
| HALTON REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $2,552,331 | $20,961,871 | 12.18% |
| SAULT STE. MARIE REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $68,628 | $895,754 | 7.66% |
| GREY SAUBLE CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $183,391 | $2,446,667 | 7.50% |
| HAMILTON REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $946,236 | $13,292,196 | 7.12% |
| MAITLAND VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $159,033 | $2,323,040 | 6.85% |
| CATFISH CREEK CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $77,794 | $1,221,186 | 6.37% |
| MISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $156,842 | $2,863,757 | 5.48% |
| THE NORTH BAY-MATTAWA CONSERVATION AUTHORITY | $193,287 | $4,114,592 | 4.70% |
*According to The Nature Conservancy of Canada's Income Tax filing, NCC has donated these amounts to the following CA's.
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
$15,257 - 2013
Long Point Region Conservation Authority
$360,000 - 2013
Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
$1,343 - 2012 (Declared $0)
Essex Region Conservation Authority
$425,000 - 2011 (Declared $197,853)
The Toronto And Region Conservation Authority
$28,209 - 2011
Essex Region Conservation Authority
$1,471,000 - 2010 (Declared $135,510)
The Toronto And Region Conservation Authority
$787,350 - 2010
Long Point Region Conservation Authority
$94,174 - 2010 (Declared $0)
Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
$15,931 - 2010
Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority
$322,000 - 2009 (Declared $15,925)
TBD:
Why did NCC donate over $1.4-million to ERCA?
ERCA only claimed to have received $135k.
Was this a land purchase/transaction/gift ?
If Conservation Ontario does not oversee the CA's who knows how much land each one actually owns?
We know that LPRCA transfers lands to NCC but does not account for it openly on their Annual Reports.
Are lands able to be transferred without informing the public?
Since CA Board members are also elected officials can they be sued for not doing their fiduciary duty to taxpayers or held accountable?
Is the Provincial Government responsible for Conservation Ontario? How?
When will Conservation Authority's become transparent and openly produce their financial statements?
Why doesn't Conservation Ontario provide the People of Ontario with this information?
Openly.
No comments:
Post a Comment