I don't remember where I heard it or saw it but isn't the BLM real happy about the compliance numbers for the passes? Somewhere in the 80 to 90 percent range.
I seem to recall the business plan was based on 40 percent compliance.
A whole bunch of questions sure come to mind.
Full Version: Budget Question
Jeff, I just added a Compliance Snapshot Report to the documents section at www.isdratrt.org. There's a link on the home page.
Thanks
| QUOTE |
| Compliance SnapShots - The compliance checks at Buttercup are being done by the camp hosts. They have been doing them since they arrived this year. There are numbers for checks done at Wash Rd., Gecko, Glamis Flats, and Dunebuggy Flats also. Most checks are a hundred units. 58% have Season passes, 36% have week passes. Total compliance comes to 94%. |
So how will this affect the future price, budget, etc?
The business plan for this was based upon a 40 to 60 percent compliance.
| QUOTE (JET @ Jan 17 2005, 07:43 PM) |
| So how will this affect the future price, budget, etc? The business plan for this was based upon a 40 to 60 percent compliance. |
Good question. That remains to be seen. The TRT recently asked for a current budget report and has been told that there is not one available as they have no one to update it.
So are you saying that they are saying there isn't any accountability for the fee's and budget?
Sounds to me like the company is experiancing a record windfall profits.
Yet the stockholders are getting little in return.
Yet the stockholders are getting little in return.
If you believe the BLM when they say it’s a “cost recover fee” or the story about how OHV users want to pay for enhanced facilities then it seems that with that high rate of compliance should come some improvements (like more paved roads and RV pads, piped in water, friendly Rangers with more security)- you know, things like that
So if you see reduced fees or more improvements, then the BLM is earnest in their actions
I think the real reason for fees is the BLM wants to limit the number of OHV users in a futile attempt to appease the greens
I suspect the BLM will feel overwhelmed with increased OHV usage and will increase future fees
Whatever the traffic will bear
PS
Now that I think of it, the BLM may just keep increasing the fee until they get fifty percent or less compliance so they have something to cry about
And while I’m cribbing about things, that extra charge for Internet sales for the ISDRA pass is not PC
Internet business is the best thing to ever happen for a cleaner environment
So if you see reduced fees or more improvements, then the BLM is earnest in their actions
I think the real reason for fees is the BLM wants to limit the number of OHV users in a futile attempt to appease the greens
I suspect the BLM will feel overwhelmed with increased OHV usage and will increase future fees
Whatever the traffic will bear
PS
Now that I think of it, the BLM may just keep increasing the fee until they get fifty percent or less compliance so they have something to cry about
And while I’m cribbing about things, that extra charge for Internet sales for the ISDRA pass is not PC
Internet business is the best thing to ever happen for a cleaner environment
| QUOTE (JET @ Jan 23 2005, 10:38 AM) |
| So are you saying that they are saying there isn't any accountability for the fee's and budget? |
Sorry Jeff, I haven't been online much lately.
No, I'm not. What I'm saying is that the TRT asked and had not been given an updated budget report. My personal feeling is that the lack of a full-time manager for the ECFO is part of the problem.
So they aren't saying it but it sure looks like that is what is happening. Glad the TRT is on top of this and keeping them in line.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.