SPC gives support to reviews
By Lethbridge Herald on October 12, 2024.
Al Beeber
LETHBRIDGE HERALD
The Economic and Standing Policy Committee of Lethbridge city council on Thursday unanimously gave its blessing to fee-for-service cost benefit analyses of Economic Development Lethbridge and Tourism Lethbridge.
The SPC consists of the mayor and all members of council.
Thursday’s vote after a lengthy discussion recommends council direct City administration to conduct and complete reviews of those two organizations as contained in the draft fee for service cost benefit analysis review plans that were presented to the SPC by Chief Financial Officer and treasurer Darrell Mathews.
The recommendation asks administration to return to council through the SPC with the findings no later than the first quarter of 2026.
Mathews’ report says the objective of cost benefit analysis plans for both organizations is to “evaluate the current and alternative models of services provided to the City of Lethbridge by EDL and Tourism Lethbridge, and to review the operational recommendations from the KPMG Phase 3 report.”
A June 11 motion of council to direct City Manager Lloyd Brierley to undertake a review of fee-for-service agreements with those two organizations was deferred to the July 11 meeting of Economic and Finance SPC to gather more information.
On July 11, the SPC directed administration to work with EDL and Tourism Lethbridge to “create a scoping document, timeline, budget, as well as workload and resources required from each organization” and recommend that council direction administration to return to today’s SPC meeting with report considering the KPMG report recommendations for EDL which were discussed by council on July 23.
Mathews told the SPC the information before it included the draft work plan being developed by the City as well as the actual work requirements and budgetary pieces of time for EDL and Tourism Lethbridge. And it included background information in regard to what council has historically said through agreement with EDL or the approved mandate that’s within the terms of reference for the Lethbridge Destination management organization, which is also known as Tourism Lethbridge.
Councillor Belinda Crowson asked City Manager Lloyd Brierley about how much the reviews are not about EDL and Tourism Lethbridge but rather “about the fact that the City of Lethbridge has historically not done fee-for-service well.
“We have not built in performance metrics, we have not built in evaluations, and so even though it seems like the focus is on these two organizations, how much of this really, truly is about us and bettering our processes?”
Brierley called the reviews “typically standard business practice and so while this might feel to some that have not been through this as a punitive exercise, it is absolutely by no means.
:It’s good business and sometimes what that does, it ensures we’re aligned. Here is what the City is expecting for the funds that they provide in terms of returns and beyond that it ensures that the organization has a common understanding and where we can do a course correction.
“It might be that the organization has some really good things planned that isn’t well understood by the City, that the City’s the one sometimes needing to do a course correction,” Brierley told Crowson.
“That could result in more funding sometimes, other times it could result in funding being distributed in different ways,” the City Manager added.
He also added the reviews are “absolutely about the need to improve” at the City level.
Crowson asked if the reviews are the start of the City doing performance metrics as rigorously internally “to make sure we’re getting the same success, the same metrics.”
Brierley responded “absolutely. The work’s already well underway internally on that as far as the metrics and the service levels and the reporting. And some of it will be for internal purposes and then eventually there will be aspects of it subject to council’s approval, externally posted available for public where we can see, and the public can see, how these services are performing.”
Councillor Jenn Schmidt-Rempel asked Mathews which value-for-money approach the City will being using in the reviews, saying there are different types such as social return on investment analysis which she said should be considered on such things as affordable housing projects and child care project delivery, and additional clinic development.
Mathews told the councillor that in discussions with EDL and Tourism Lethbridge at this stage he couldn’t yet say.
“It really depends on the data in regards to what’s available. Some of the things like for the social investment return on investment component it’s very complex in the amount of data you can have. I know in talking to Tourism Lethbridge some of that is difficult to get because some of it’s contained with other partners and so forth and it may be expensive and time consuming to get. So as we go through and assess the data elements in the planning phases, then we’ll be able to come back and answer which model we’ll be able to use,” said Mathews, adding that “one size may not fit all.”
During debate, Crowson said if discussions had been held with the two organizations before the review requests came before council, the process could have been moved along quicker, noting fee for services require community partners with an expertise and knowledge the City doesn’t have, partners which bring “an incredible benefit to our community and by working with them in partnership, we can get a lot more done.”
Crowson said she would support the reviews saying they are actually about improving the City’s processes on fee-for-services.
“While we are starting with EDL and Tourism Lethbridge, as you’ve heard this will be reaching out to more places.”
Schmidt-Rempel also voiced support despite seeing some gaps in the documents and expressed concerns how it could “stall out our work in the economic development and tourism space and I do hope what we learn out of this will improve our City processes and support these two community partners.”
26-25
Standard business practice is right!