One of my platform planks during our last election was getting rid of IPG. Alas! Ahead of my time with no money and no credentials. Nor connections. Bummer being an opinionated nobody. Maybe this “ball” can be caught during the next election and some one else can run with it. As an aside, again I say IPG sure has a swell website complete with it’s own built in rose coloured glasses.

Ben,
You forgot the China holiday.

http://m.princegeorgecitizen.com/article/20121119/PRINCEGEORGE0101/311199989/pg-contingent-china-bound&template=JQMArticle

Harb: “One of my platform planks during our last election was getting rid of IPG. Alas! Ahead of my time with no money and no credentials. Nor connections. Bummer being an opinionated nobody. “

Still fighting the last election? In any case, don’t pat yourself on the back too hard. A lot of people question IPG’s existence, myself included.

And by the way, Ben, you’re right on the money!

The taxpayers funding IPG can only dream city council would be clever enough to take a hard look at IPG and see if he benefits generated exceed the expenditures.

Given the promotion of the river road dike, PG Hotel purchase, downtown land purchaser’s, and the purchase of energy from Lakeland Mills, all at taxpayer expense, don’t hold your breath and expect a logical decison about the future of IPG to be made by city council.

City councils solutions are limited to raising user and utility fees.

For a Million saved you can do a lot of Street Repairs.

I agree, get rid of IPG. Good job Ben.

From the start the trip to China only had a few people going according to media announcements. Green, Wilbur, Hall Hall was not sure for a while if he could go and someone else was to go in his spot) and Soltice – all were mentioned in various media. At the last minute, we were told through one media outlet that IPG Heather Oland was going. Now if this is City business it will be interesting to see who pays for Oland and why it was mentioned at the last minute.

Perhaps City could have an internal review and start cutting back. – I can dream…..

Hey, JohnnyBelt. If I don’t keep patting myself on my back who will? Gotta keep my ego in great shape. It’s all I got.

IPG …. AND any other organization operated by governments at all levels directly or indirectly needs to report out to its shareholders, the taxpaying public.

The reporting out on a quarterly and annual basis must include:

1. short, intermediate, and long term objectives stated in measurable quantities

2. input activities – such as meetings, reports, trade shows, etc.

3. output activities – such as new business relocated to PG, existing business in PG expanded, business retained in PG, fee for service income etc. Include negative outputs as well – results of input activities which failed when business decided on other options which did not benefit PG and region.

4. statement on proportion of output objectives that was as a result of direct IPG input and how much was by others “partnering” in the efforts.

5. value for money – expected benefits to businesses and PG and its service region per dollar spent.

6. written statements from businesses involved that received assistance in the value they received – highlight some and provide general survey .

7. Be as “transparent” as can be without jeopardizing business confidentiality and negotiation outcomes.
For transparency in public funded organizations I typically stat with the USA rather than Canada since I have developed the probably biased view that the USA has already been on the road to transparency longer than Canada has been.

So, here is the state of the union in the City of Corvallis, Oregon which just created an Economic Development Commission in 2010.
http://www.corvallisoregon.gov/index.aspx?page=410

Go to the bottom of the page to see meeting agendas and minutes ….. similar to info we have on line for City Council.

There is no reason why IPG cannot do that and every reason in the world of why they should do it. City Council needs to demand that as part of their funding agreement.

If the work is internalized, that department should be directed by a public commission such as Corvallis has. If not, we will never hear a report from that department. We ought to.

This is the agenda package for their November 19, 2012 meeting. I find the business activity report at the bottom of the agenda of special interest.
http://archive.ci.corvallis.or.us/0/doc/349076/Electronic.aspx

I have not been able to find any such information as Corvallis shares with the world on our IPG site. Maybe someone else has better luck. Let us know if you do, please.
http://www.initiativespg.com/About_IPG/board.php

If they cannot be responsible to the taxpayer, then internalzing economic development is sure not going to do it either.

Harb: “Hey, JohnnyBelt. If I don’t keep patting myself on my back who will?”

How true it is. :)

And gus, good post. If IPG were held up to those standards, it would not be long before they ceased to exist, saving taxpayers $1 million per year.

All we need is some documented information from any and all business’s in Prince George outlining how IPG impacted thier business.

I suggest that very little information would be forthcoming because most business’s in Prince George have nothing to do with IPG. They are quite capable of looking after themselves.

In fact I’m sure that a lot of firms would consider it an insult to suggest that they need the services of IPG.

IPG is nothing more than a self agrandizing entity,, that serves no useful purpose, other than providing jobs to those who are connected. Anything they do, could be done with a small increase in staff at City Hall.

The passed CEO of IPG did the local drive for investment,that was then and this is now. The trip by IPG was a complete wast and way outside their mandate for sure.Shut it down pay the severance and move on and get the City ecomomic development office doing their job,

Agree with the posters here. Any other organization receiving public funds must prove need, sustainability, sound management, proven deliverables and direct benefit to the funders (us) in line with an approved action/business plan, among other things.

IPG has done none of the above, IMO.

I see they are back up to the brim with staff again; was it not recently that Olund approached Council speaking of streamlining staff, running more efficiently and working on her ability to present measurable outputs for her well funded organization?

I am surprised, Ben, you did not pick up on Green’s galpal joining the JUNKet to China. Regardless of whose budget it comes out of for Olund, it is all funded by the City via the taxpayer, in the end anyway, so I don’t care where you post the expense.

So, the China Expedition is to increase tourism opportunities (focusing on the hard work and expertise in historical interpretation of the crew at Barkerville), increase overseas students in our college and university and to highlight business opportunities there….

Yet we have the Mayor, a retired Lawyer and school board trustee, an INTERIM City manager and now the CEO of an organization that has not, to date, delivered anything tangible or substantial in terms of business investment in PG.

Missing, is actual representation of Barkerville, tourism, business or our college and university.

Olund almost literally flew in to join the fugley flock, under the radar.

It is sickening.

Right on the money again Ben!

Just in case people forgot or may not have been aware before, CNC signed an exchange agreement with the Changsha Communications Institute in China in May of 1990, more than 22 years ago after a previous trip to lay the foundation for such an exchange agreement.

So, we could say. “Been there, done that”.

So, enquiring minds want to know: “how successful was the outcome for CNC, PG and Changsha Communications Institute” as seen through a 2012 mirror.

We agree with you Ben ,Thanks for having the GUTS to agree to disagree. Why don’t you do a poll to see how many people want to keep spending money IPG.

The whole reason IPG is outside of city hall is so they don’t have to report and be transparent with the public… ditto for the tourism boards and others like them. Its how the politicians can reward their friends with patronage.

If we are to have honest government then we need to do away with these private bureaucrats funded with public dollars.

Exactly what I was pondering, Eagleone, well said. My favourite term in politics – Patronage! Follow that same line when it comes to contracting out our public services to private,for profit driven, business. Same sh*t, different shovel.

Every level of government does it including First Nations. They are all corrupt because we are too lazy to protest in numbers. It’s our fault that governing bodies in Canada are like that. We deserve what we get! Some one has to be front and center and a leader as well if protests are to organized and effective.

Why do people continually say “we deserve what we get”. Don’t we deserve an honest and open democratic govt whom we voted for without having to watch them through a microscope continuously? They aren’t corrupt because people are too lazy to protest, they are corrupt because that is the type of person politics now seems to attract. The whole system needs a change..

Exactly But!