Army Reserve Restructuring

[MilEME09]

$88,920.41 in PILT to Bighorn, Municipal District #8.  Money spent by DND to operate and maintain the facility is another amount.

Even that seems like a lot for a facility used mostly in the summer only

 

[CBH99]

DND is the top federal organization in terms of number of buildings and square footage; it's only third in land area - Parks Canada and Environment Canada have them beat.  But still, the military is not a slouch when it comes to real estate holdings.
Granted most of that is used in support of full-time activities, but what about some of the expenses such as payment in lieu of taxation (PILT) for facilities used primarily in support of "part-time soldering".  I suppose I could have gone property by property to figure out DND's share of the $562,157,133.62 that the Canadian government shelled out in 2019 for PILT.  However, I'll limit myself to a few examples, such as here in Calgary where the 2019 PILT expense for Mewata Armoury was $312,928.36,  HMCS Tecumsah was $158,115.81, and the remaining Currie Barracks footprint comes in at $227,433.73; I don't know if the armoury in the NE is still being used but the City of Calgary received $147,765.61 from DND's budget in 2019.

It would be nice to have the wide open space of a re-purposed mall or similar commercial/industrial structure (I think that was the background of the armoury in NE Calgary) but how much of it would actually be "efficiently" utilized for one evening a week and one or two weekends a month for nine or ten months a year.  There's a not insignificant cost to that footprint.

Can someone explain just in brief terms why DND is paying various municipalities and such, these payments?

Aren't the buildings already bought/paid for out of DND budget? 

 

[dapaterson]

Can someone explain just in brief terms why DND is paying various municipalities and such, these payments?

Aren't the buildings already bought/paid for out of DND budget?

"Normal" buildings would pay property taxes to support municipal infrastructure and services.  Federal government properties do not; they make "payments in lieu of taxes" or PILT instead.

 

[FJAG]

"Normal" buildings would pay property taxes to support municipal infrastructure and services.  Federal government properties do not; they make "payments in lieu of taxes" or PILT instead.

I've known that for decades but what I never knew was why we do. I can't see a constitutional requirement, and in fact s 125 basically exempts the Feds from taxes levied by the municipalities and provinces.

I know that there is a Fed Payment in Lieu of Taxes Act which makes it discretionary for the Minister of PWGS to make such payments but have no idea why we enacted it in the first place. The US has a similar program.

I presume this is one of those things we started doing after a lot of lobbying by provincial governments. I guess that's what happens when you're not spending your own money's, but the taxpayors. You become pretty free passing it around. All that said with the full realization that if the local authority didn't receive PILT from the Feds, they'd make up for the shortfall with a direct taxation on the local taxpayors. Just strikes me as a shell game though.

:cheers:

 

[MilEME09]

I've known that for decades but what I never knew was why we do. I can't see a constitutional requirement, and in fact s 125 basically exempts the Feds from taxes levied by the municipalities and provinces.

I know that there is a Fed Payment in Lieu of Taxes Act which makes it discretionary for the Minister of PWGS to make such payments but have no idea why we enacted it in the first place. The US has a similar program.

I presume this is one of those things we started doing after a lot of lobbying by provincial governments. I guess that's what happens when you're not spending your own money's, but the taxpayors. You become pretty free passing it around. All that said with the full realization that if the local authority didn't receive PILT from the Feds, they'd make up for the shortfall with a direct taxation on the local taxpayors. Just strikes me as a shell game though.

:cheers:

Sounds like a line item the department could easily cut to out money to more important things.

 

[dapaterson]

Sounds like a line item the department could easily cut to out money to more important things.

And relationships with communities would suffer.

Defence infra expenditures are more tied to construction than maintenance or PILT.  Savings would be minor to result in major disruptions (not only DND/CAF, but also other departments).

 

[MJP]

Dapa beat me

Sounds like a line item the department could easily cut to out money to more important things.

Like move it directly into re-building the municipal infrastructure that currently services DND land and buildings once we are cut off from provided municipal services?

Some bases have limited autonomy from local services but most are beholden to utilize the same infrastructure that the rest of the surrounding community uses. Those things aren't free and municipalities would take a hard line if the Feds stopped paying their share. It can be as FJAG points out a bit of a shell game as it is lots of federal dollars that likely created that infra, but O&M still costs a pretty penny. PILT is our contribution to that.

 

[daftandbarmy]

And relationships with communities would suffer.

Defence infra expenditures are more tied to construction than maintenance or PILT.  Savings would be minor to result in major disruptions (not only DND/CAF, but also other departments).

And, as the Irish Fusiliers of Canada discovered after their armoury in Vancouver burned down, there's a strong connection between 'Militia Regiment Survival' and 'Having a Home Armoury'.

"By the end of World War I the building had been adapted for military use and became known as The Stanley Park Armouries, later the home of the Vancouver Regiment of the Irish Fusiliers of Canada.

The Armouries remained in use as a regimental headquarters and mixed-use venue through the Second World War and the 1950s — until March 18, 1960 when disaster struck.

March 17 was, of course, St. Patrick’s Day, and the officers and men of the Irish Fusiliers held their weekly parade in the building and lingered into the evening to celebrate Ireland’s great holiday. Sometime early in the morning of March 18 a fire broke out, destroying the wooden structure within an hour. Firefighters were able to prevent the fire from spreading to surrounding buildings, but the regimental museum’s entire collection of badges, swords, headgear, trophies, flags, and band instruments was lost."

https://www.thewestendjournal.ca/blog/2016/8/13/then-now

 

[MilEME09]

https://canadianarmytoday.com/ready-for-adaptive-dispersed-operations-the-armys-modernization-strategy/

Relevant to this conversation is the armys new 5 year strategy. One part stood out to me under restructuring and the PRes

"Over the past five years, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) has seen a 1,000 percent increase in Operation Lentus taskings. One option under consideration is bringing the Reserves onto full-time service for specific periods each year. The Army is also seeing how it can make the best use of full-time summer employment. “We are still exploring that space,” said Eyre."


Bring a reserve unit as a whole to full time service would require a monumental legislative change, one the next CDS would have to really push for if they want to go down that path.

 

[brihard]

Bring a reserve unit as a whole to full time service would require a monumental legislative change, one the next CDS would have to really push for if they want to go down that path.

I'll bite. Why? Is there anything required that cannot already be proclaimed via Order in Council?

I mean, second order effects like job protection and such, sure. But calling up reservists to do military stuff is already provided for in legislation, no?

 

[MilEME09]

I'll bite. Why? Is there anything required that cannot already be proclaimed via Order in Council?

I mean, second order effects like job protection and such, sure. But calling up reservists to do military stuff is already provided for in legislation, no?

If they want to do it regularly then the most efficient means would be to allow it without an OIC, outside a OIC the PRes is only authorized 60 Class A and 10 Class B days per year. Plus secondary job protect which I would hope would be at the federal level and cover all of Canada, instead of the patchwork Canada currently has.

 

[FJAG]

"Over the past five years, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) has seen a 1,000 percent increase in Operation Lentus taskings. One option under consideration is bringing the Reserves onto full-time service for specific periods each year. The Army is also seeing how it can make the best use of full-time summer employment. “We are still exploring that space,” said Eyre."


Bring a reserve unit as a whole to full time service would require a monumental legislative change, one the next CDS would have to really push for if they want to go down that path.

With respect, I think that you are misinterpreting what the article said.

In this respect I'll also mirror what Brihard said. The legislative provisions are already there if the GiC chooses to exercise their power for call-out under s 33(2)(B) of the NDA. To facilitate such a call-out, the government could pass a regulation to delegate such powers to the MND in the case of certain situations much like it did with QR&O article 9.04(3) for emergencies (Note emergencies are defined in the legislation as:  "war, invasion, riot or insurrection, real or apprehended" and not natural disasters etc.)

I think all that is being put forward here is a planned request for volunteers to be available for or to be put on Class B for employment in the case of what are becoming seasonally predictable disasters (such as flooding along the Ottawa and St Lawrence) rather then waiting for the event and then cobbling together a force.

If they want to do it regularly then the most efficient means would be to allow it without an OIC, outside a OIC the PRes is only authorized 60 Class A and 10 Class B days per year. Plus secondary job protect which I would hope would be at the federal level and cover all of Canada, instead of the patchwork Canada currently has.

The 60 days Class A and 15 days Class B service are only with respect to being "ordered to train" pursuant to QR&O 9.04(2). It does not apply to voluntary attendance of any type and it does not apply to any call out on service under an OiC.

:cheers:

 

[MilEME09]

You are right i probably am, without additional detail you are probably correct and this would be a class B/C similar to what we saw with OP laser this past year, a short term stand by force.

 

[BDTyre]

outside a OIC the PRes is only authorized 60 Class A days...per year.

I'm sure I've exceeded that some years.

 

[FJAG]

I'm sure I've exceeded that some years.

There is no problem exceeding 60 days per year as long as it's voluntary and has been authorized by the CoC. See above.

:cheers:

 

[BDTyre]

There is no problem exceeding 60 days per year as long as it's voluntary and has been authorized by the CoC. See above.

:cheers:

My point exactly.

Oh...does voluntold count?

 

[MilEME09]

Open question: With the pandemic causing reservists to be called up more, on top of OP lentus tasks, Reservists are becoming more important and in the spot light more. As a result I wonder if this will create a push for reorg or create legislative changes.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Open question: With the pandemic causing reservists to be called up more, on top of OP lentus tasks, Reservists are becoming more important and in the spot light more. As a result I wonder if this will create a push for reorg or create legislative changes.

No.

IMHO, if 10 years of AFG and the insanely busy fire fighting years (2017-18) haven't done that already, it will never happen.

 

[MilEME09]

No.

IMHO, if 10 years of AFG and the insanely busy fire fighting years (2017-18) haven't done that already, it will never happen.

AFG wasn't in their own backyards though. Peoples mind sets tend to change when your response to a crisis can effect your reelection.

 

[MJP]

AFG wasn't in their own backyards though. Peoples mind sets tend to change when your response to a crisis can effect your reelection.

Meh, the CAF and PRes have no hold on public conscious beyond the headlines of today. Any serious PRes restructuring will have to come from within the CAF itself in line with current legislation. There is no upswell to to force the government to intervene and create new legislation.