Your news this week: New Andrew CAO hired - 2 Babas and Borshch around the corner - 3 Road repair help needed in Andrew - 10 OPINION: Fertilizer (un)plan - 4
Proud to be an Independent CANADIAN Publication
FREE
www.LamontLeader.com Vol. 17, No. 36, Wednesday, August 3, 2022
GoFundMe donations for man who drowned at Astotin Lake in EINP exceeds $100,000
Family photo of Sachin Kadam, wife Swara, and daughter Sara.
BY KERRY ANDERSON A GoFundMe page set up for Sachin Kadam, the 42-year-old man who drowned in a paddle boarding accident on Astotin Lake in Elk Island National Park (EINP) on July 23, has raised over $100,000 to help pay family debt and his only child’s education. As reported in last week’s Lamont Leader, Kadam was paddleboarding in EINP with a friend when he fell into Astotin Lake and never surfaced. A search party including EINP, Lamont County and Strathcona Emergency Services began immediately after police were notified at 5:20 pm. With no sign of Kadam that evening, a helicopter was dispatched to fly over the lake on July 24 but the water was too murky for a visual. The next day with still no sign of the victim’s body, a
dive team and cadaver dog were sent in and located Kadam’s body at 11:55 am. It was reported that Kadam was a strong swimmer, which made the event even more shocking. He leaves behind his wife Swara and 10-year-old daughter Sara. Vishnu Kaginkar, a family friend, set up the GoFundMe page because he said Kadam was the only breadwinner in the family. Within a day, almost $65,000 was raised. The total was at $101,730 on Tuesday morning. Kanginkar said that Kadam moved to Canada from India in 2014 with his wife and young daughter. He was a welder who worked in the oil and gas industry. The funeral for Sachin Kadam was scheduled for Saturday, July 30.
CAO spending limited to $149,999 without council’s final approval BY JOHN MATHER After a heated debate June 28, Lamont County Council refused to give Chief Administrative Officer Peter Tarnawsky the ability to solely approve goods and services purchases or construction contracts up to $999,999 without council reviewing the documents. Instead, Council voted to hold the limit to $149,999 and after that they want to review the purchases or contracts. Council was asked to review a new procurement policy at the regular council meeting which would rescind a previous procurement policy from 2018 and the administrative purchasing procedure from the same date. Under the previous policy the County manager could purchase goods and services from $25,000 and up only with approval of council in a motion or to authorize construction contracts from $200,000 and up with a motion from Council.
Chief Financial Officer Rodney Boyko reported to Council regarding the policy changes. When Reeve David Diduck asked if Council was comfortable with the purchasing levels outlined in the proposed policy Neil Woitas from Division Five quickly said no. “I want to make changes,” he said. “Stop them all at $74,999.” Diduck asked if he meant he wanted to see everything come before council. “I want it just like we’ve been doing before,” replied Woitas. “Giving someone authorization up to a million dollars isn’t good.” Boyko said his only worry with that would be it would result in slowing down the procurement processes. “Having to come back with an expenditure to go forward and having to wait two weeks to get Council’s authority is going to slow everything down,” said Boyko. “Having administration have those higher purchasing
levels keeps council clear of some of the politics of those decisions but also allows for a smoother operation that doesn’t require Council approval.” He indicated that with the Council summer break it would further delay the decision-making process. Woitas said they wouldn’t be buying anything or approving any contracts during the summer recess period. CAO Tarnawsky said the new suggested parameters for the purchasing guidelines were based on studying other jurisdictions of similar size. He told council it became painful if all the purchasing decisions had to come back to Council for authorization. “It is painful for the Council and it is painful in getting the process moving forward within the business plan,” he said. “We’re brought in to look after the ratepayers money,” said Woitas. “And these money decisions would be
brought forward at the start of the meeting. If the meeting carries on into another day it would still be covered.” He felt limiting the administration to sole expenditures of up to $74,999. was fine but council should be in on the approval of amounts greater than that. Division One Councillor Daniel Warawa thought going from $74,999. to $999,999 in an expenditure should still come to Council for a final decision. Tarnawsky stated that even with the higher limits Council would have approved the purchasing decisions in budget discussions. “You’ll have had a couple of kicks at this before the item is acquired or the contract approved," he said. Warawa agreed with that statement. Woitas argued equipment purchased during the past winter, including a snow plow and a grader, hadn’t been done correctly. Continued on Page 14