Loading...
07 - March 22, 2021 County Council Agenda PackageAl�lllllllll 0 lgln " c ORDERS OF THE DAY SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING FOR MONDAY. MARCH 22, 2021- 4:00 P.M. ORDER 1 st Meeting Called to Order 2nd Adoption of Minutes 3rd Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof 4th Presenting Petitions, Presentations and Delegations 4:00 p.m. — Regional Economic Development Services Feasibility Study Final Report — StrategyCorp Inc. 5th Motion to Move Into "Committee Of The Whole Council" 6th Reports of Council, Outside Boards and Staff 7th Council Correspondence 1) Items for Consideration 2) Items for Information (Consent Agenda) 8th OTHER BUSINESS 1) Statements/Inquiries by Members 2) Notice of Motion 3) Matters of Urgency 9th Closed Meeting Items 10th Recess 11 th Motion to Rise and Report 12th Motion to Adopt Recommendations from the Committee Of The Whole 13th Consideration of By-laws 14th ADJOURNMENT Video Conference Meeting — IN -PERSON PARTICIPATION RESTRICTED NOTE FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC: Please click the link below to watch the Council Meeting: Ir s://rnrnrn.faceshook.cor�rn/II::::::Ilgiil. pu Ir�:.....rrn„ii.I./ Accessible formats available upon request. 2020 1 ©STRATEGYCORP March 8, 2021 Elgin County Regional Economic Development Services Feasibility StudyFinal Report (DRAFT) 2 (pg. 22) (pg. 13) (pg. 3) Jurisdictional Scan Options Overview - – Appendix A Appendix B Executive Summary 123 Table of Contents 3 Practice |Project Scope & Overview|Stakeholder Engagement Key Findings |Frame of Reference & Economic Development Best |Current State Assessment|Options Overview|Matrix of Evaluation | Recommendation Executive Summary 4 s y w e e i K y p i v y r h t C e s n t r s u ne a ty I o d l m i C a c o e n n h i L oun Tug l EDC and CountyLeadership, and staffSt. Thomas Leadership . o tE y of St. Thomas. C S l i c n ) t u C n s o c e D i C w E m m e y , i t p o y v nt Stakeholder Engagement o r n l un e o e t u o c v n o CE Ie Shared Services Recommendations C n D ( i ty Councillors i g l E 9 County Councillors9 C8 Representatives fromCounty LMPs, and; To assess the feasibility and willingness to develop a regional economic development function; we spoke to: Approach Overview Project Scope and Overview Following Elgin County’s Service Delivery Review, and a recent vacancy of its economic development leadership position, the Cengaged StrategyCorp to assess the feasibility and viability of creating a regional economic development service with the CitThe figures below set out the approach used to conduct this feasibility study. 55 ired for a omic equ ments for effective con ire through areas: - In Practice… Acquire a good understanding of the local community’s market and assetsEnablement of targeted programming and staff: capabilities around relevant research of the local market and assets, implementation of an economic development strategic plan, building local capacity, and tracking performance. Respect local capacity by recognizing existing organizations in the community: Any municipality involved, or looking to invest, in local economic development must work to complement such existing organizations and fulfill the necessary gaps that cannot be satisfied alreadyPartnering with neighboring municipalities (in this case between the County, and the City), and participating in regional consortia to increase and improve service level reach, and establish consistency in outcome achievement Community UnderstandingDedicated StaffWorking with the CommunityPartnership Applying the guiding principles in practice should include (but is not limited to) consideration of the following key follow in from the - tier municipalities, in - business to manufacturing to - How to Assess Economic Development Best Practice y – t i y u t i including LMPs. q v E i– n s i y - u t l i y c C u n Key Principles I B d c n e i a v i m t y t oc n e n l l u o co o E There is a diverse range of businesses across Elgin County. The needs of each, from agrilocal entrepreneurs, will all be considered.A joint economic development model must be beneficial to both the County and its loweraddition to St. Thomas.The recommended approach to joint economic development should be able to achieve buyCounty as a whole C C Frame of Reference The guiding principles noted below are used as a frame of reference for understanding and assessing the impacts of regional edevelopment options for the County, and the City. Engagement with stakeholders has highlighted some of the crucial elements rregional economic development function to be successful. In practice, these principles have been distilled into four key requand representative service delivery. 6 omic prerequisites con ant n o i t c a r t s t t n e i e A t i d m n en u v at l r o n o v o p i n t I p n s O e s t e e e d n i i R s s w u - s Bn e l o n i i a s g c u e o L The governance of a joint economic development service should include the voices of local business and not just politicians.B Economic development should engage in both the retention and servicing of existing businesses, in addition to attracting new business and industries.R There are a number of opportunities that can be better met by the combined resources of a joint economic development effort, such as the airport and previous Ford lands. s r o n t a o i c i g d e n R I s e s c o r n c a A m r e c Key Themes Emerging from Stakeholder Engagement o i f regional economic development function. r v r e – e P S d c i n g a m n i s o e n m v i i o Tt c c E e e j n e l b u t b O r a tr o i a p u e p l q sustainable and effective O The level of interest and rapport between the County and City have not been this strong in a long time. If there is a time to try a joint approach, it is now.E A joint economic development function needs to interact with and benefit the diverse industries across the County and St. Thomas.C To be successful, establishing clear, agreed upon objectives that can be measured and regularly reported on will be essential to the success of economic development. Level Findings - High Key findings emerging through our engagements across both the County and the City emphasize a strong willingness to improve edevelopment programs and services through a shared service model. With this in mind, many participants also identified importto achieving a 7 mic Tourism Small business outreach and support(expansion, relocation, operationsretention, community B2Bnetworking, etc).Investment attraction & CitypromotionWorkforce guidance and leadership Rupp - Karn Ltd - Services provided include: •••• $614,931; - ~39,000 $620,101** from Gorman from Dowler – – $592,262; 2018 Chamber of Commerce - from Geerlinks Home Hardware – – Current State (St. Thomas/EDC) VP St. Thomas Public Art Centre $652,195 nd – - Labour Representative – Vice President st $629,640; 2020 - St. Thomas EDCElgin/St. Thomas Small BusinessEnterprise Centre (SBEC)Railway City TourismHorton Farmers’ MarketRobert Furneaux, President Dan Kelly 1Craig Geerlinks 2Ray Bosveld, Treasurer Dani Bartlett Laura Woermke Three St. Thomas Representatives (Mayor and Councillors) **St. Thomas EDC Budget: 20172019 Corporation that is comprised of 4 intertwined business units:••••Overseen by a volunteer Board of Directors who represent the community:••••••• - CIP) which $1,318,218; 2018 - – $852,138 - Economic Development Service Profile – ~50,000 $961,297; 2020 - $1,099,504* Overseen by Elgin County CAO Current State (Elgin County) *Elgin County Economic Development Spend: 2017$1,266,453; 2019 level overview of the economic development functions provided by the County of Elgin and St. Thomas’ Econo - TourismElgincentives (Community Improvement Program promotes and stimulates private sector investment in land andbuildingsInitiatives such as the Elgin County Conference SeriesSmall business outreach (Delivered through the EDC’s SBEC)Partnership with the Elgin Business Resource Centre to supportthe local business community Economic Development sits under the County’s Administrative Services department. Key services provided include: ••••• Service 20 (avg) Services Provided: Population Structure & Governance Annual Costs 2017- Current State Overview Below presents a highDevelopment Corporation (EDC). 8 cipality; and ss both Elgin uni cro Economic development does not recognize – s St. Thomas e c r u Some priority areas, such as in the arts and culture, o Local competition is counterintuitive, and The Small Business Enterprise Centre already has a – s – es – e R n t i s t o y i i u r r t ir a o t t T i e r n y p P t e i c m ni m wide strategy and support o u- e l m c plmo a n mm c o oo o c Cpolitical boundaries; there is an opportunity to put forward a more attractive offering to businesses through a joint offering, particularly with respect to access to developable land Lchallenges the opportunities that can emerge from economic spillover and positive externalities between the County and the City (talent/skills, residential development, etc.)Crelationship with the County; there is an opportunity to increase reach to more rural parts of the County Eand agricultural/food business require additional support. These business areas operate without municipal boundary and lend themselves to a county Key Opportunities and Challenges – Elgin County There is a broad range of economic – Trust in the economic development function Evaluation criteria for economic development s – – e i The size and diverse makeup of the County and its t yt s i c – r u a r so cli t i r fe y f P v t i E e c i n L m u m e a c o rm i n g v m r o o o r c e Pservices do not exist, making it difficult to measure the economic development impacts of the County’s programs and servicesSmunicipalities makes providing consistent services a challenge with current staffing levelsEpriorities across the County’s Local Municipal PartnersCacross the County can be strengthened through better grassroots effort and outreach to small businesses Current State Overview StrategyCorp’s engagement with staff, business leadership, and Council helped identify the key opportunities and challenges aCounty and the City of St. Thomas. Notably, there are opportunities and challenges that are both mutual, and unique to each mtogether presuppose a need for a coordinated and sustainable Economic Development function 9 guiding principles, the Function looks like: A suite of services and expertise that respondsto diverse needs of County LMPs and communitybusinesses across rural and urban settingsImproved strategic clarity on the direction ofeconomic developmentExpansion of services and opportunities forsector specialization among teamsCoordinated and streamlined investmentattraction and retention efforts An Effective Regional Economic Development 1.2.3.4. t n Synthesizing our Findings – (residential, foreign direct investment, made EDC, which allows the County to quickly - Essex, highlighting a clear opportunity to cultivate more - irection and strategy. It has been cited that lack of impact assessments and f Windsor Current state analysis yields the key takeaways noted below… Elgin County’s economic development function requires more clarity idclear direction and strategy has resulted in minimal transparency and visibility into the real benefits of the County’s programs and servicesEconomic development between the County and the City is currentlyartificially constrained by political boundaries; resulting in opportunity costs related to positive economic spillovers land development, and talent and skills, etc.) St. Thomas has a readyimprove economic development services by leveraging the existing suite of skills/talent, and program infrastructureTogether, St. Thomas (EDC) & Elgin County would have a budget that rivals thaocomprehensive, accessible, and differentiated economic development services 1234 Current State Overview Keeping in mind the opportunities and challenges in the current state across both the County and the City as they compare to and overarching key interview themes, it is important to note a few key takeaways. 10 two key ied ity at hand. Below level)* - urban divides - *AMTCO Report: Improving Service Delivery in Municipalities Through Shared Services Use Cases (High set the context, and provide additional insight into the opportun - Use Cases of Different Models for Regional Services – Maintaining status quo might run the risk of not meeting the County’s economic development goals; with specialemphasis on LMP and diverse sector needsExpansion of operations and services (wider provision of services to new demographic areas)To strengthen servicing for rural communities, and close ruralLeveraged to reduce redundancy across two municipalities, and to increase efficiency and clarity in servicesLeveraged to decrease costs while maintaining or expanding service levelsLeveraged when municipalities want to have a service function that delegates different responsibilities to subdivisionsor different parts of the same service function (e.g., creating specializations)Leveraged to provide new services and enhancing responsiveness to resident expectations and demandsLeveraged for regional integration, and enhancing flexibility Staying the course of current state practice is an option for assessment, but requires consideration of the key tradeoffs that emerge from maintaining the status quo: Across municipalities, this option is typically used for protection, emergency, transportation, and environmental services: Across municipalities, this option is typically used for the management of public utilities, transportation systems, community and social services, and economic development: Option Option 1: Option 2:Option 3: Agreement Memorandum of EDC Membership Maintain Status Quo Options Overview Establishing a regional economic development service between the County and the City can take on several forms. We’ve identifoptions; with the addition of a Status Quo assessment to levelwe detail the options, alongside their typical use cases. High 11 - Strong ovide prcan provide evaluate joint - Rationale provides efficiency gains presents the least offers the County Average benefit with the shortest timeframe to implementation Option 2 the County Option 2 provides the greatest Option 2 complicated option for creating ajoint economic developmentservice Option 2 and 3 opportunity to move countyresources to EDC Option 2 and 3 sufficient reach and representation; Option 3 would take longer to implement Option 2 flexibility to reeffort should it not be satisfied, while providing a proof of concept Low • ••• • built - Measure Evaluation ite of services, and lanced representation, but ounty resources to e satisfied with the Opportunity to move CEDCWere the County to not bservice, it would be difficult to change Board would have automatic bagovernance change likely to take more time to complete Participation in purposeEDC; More fundamental change to funding model likely required Updating governance,sufunding model will becomplicated Option 3: EDC Membership •••• • - 20% - Agreement *Cost savings estimates are derived from Elgin County SDR findings, 2020 ounty resources to e satisfied with the uilt EDC; Potential efficiency he same service mplement, but can be Will require effort toidone quickly andefficientlyOpportunity to move CEDCShould the County notbarrangement, it can end the agreementMunicipalities will havetBoard representation to be expanded Agreement with a purposebsavings for County of 10on current County costs can be expected Option 2: Memorandum of •••••• Option 1: Maintain Status Quo equired, however No implementation rseveral changes arerequired regardlessStaff remains the same,but with limited scaleLarge risk of opportunity cost of maintaining status quoCertain municipalitiesand business feel theydon’t get enough support Significant work would need to be done to strengthen internal approach to deliver better value for money ••••• Risk Impact Summary Degree of Evaluation Criteria Staff/People Minimization Service Reach Representation and Community Ease & Speed of Implementation Value for Money Evaluation Matrix 12 20% on c - ave 10 ctives through an o s bje level, using this approach, the - built economic development corporation. - Rationale Option 2: Memorandum of Agreement evaluation, encouraging LMP satisfaction, and trust – - making - velopment needs of LMPs and businesses An expansion of economic development suite of services that better addresses the diverse economideMinimized impact to staff in comparison to other shared services optionsOpportunity for reAbility to set and track performance measures in MOA to enhance transparency and investmentdecisionAbility to realize operating savings through shared services of 10% to 20%Easier, simpler, and more direct implementation; and faster realization of benefits Based on this study, leveraging a Memorandum of Agreement for economic development services would be the County’s most efficient and effective option. At a highCounty would see: 1.2.3.4.5.6. Recommendation Of the various options assessed, utilizing a Memorandum of Agreement would allow the County to most effectively achieve its oenhanced economic development service provided by the EDC. An additional benefit is that the County could reasonably expect ttheir current spend through economies of scale gained by contracting with a purpose 13 Maintaining Status Quo Memorandum of AgreementEDC Membership ––– |Option 1 |Option 2 |Option 3 Appendix A: Options Overview 14 Independent Functions – Option 1: Maintain Status Quo 15 tion serves to opment services. urban representation - Key Considerations evaluating Suite of Services - Re Expansion of services to establish more robust and specialized programs to meet the evolving and diverse needs of different business communities in the County Staff and People Significant investment in resources with sectoral and industry specialization will be required to encourage ruraland improve integration between County & LMPs Monitoring & Evaluation Improved impact assessments and KPIs for accountability to support and ensure equitable grassroots and outreach measures for small business across the County There are several axes of performance improvement that would be required by the County in order to maintain status quo, and better meet their economic development objectives the independent provision of economic development services. This op - Economic St. Thomas Corporation Development Providers Independent Service Economic Elgin County Development What it is Economic St. Thomas Corporation Development Providers set and provide context for what would be required if status quo was upheld with the intention of improving economic devel - Independent Service Maintaining the Status Quo Option one is for the County & City to maintain status quo level Economic Clarity in strategic directionImproved representation and LMP visibilityCosts of service expansion Elgin County Development Maintaining the status quo would mean Elgin County and the City of St. Thomas would maintain separate economic development functions. To maintain the status quo, and achieve the economic development goals and objectives, there are several performance enablers that would require consideration, ranging from, but not limited to: 1.2.3. 16 Option 2: Memorandum of Agreement 17 n. This tio law - evaluation of joint services at contract - Key Considerations term and more permanent commitment (membership) -evaluating Suite of Services - Re EDC provides a more comprehensive suite of services that would be extended to County and these services could evolve as needs change Risk Minimization MOA offers opportunity for reexpiry. This may better help establish trust among LMPs before making a long Staff Integration An MOA would allow for better management of legislative employment considerations Degree of Governance Change Under an MOA, governance changes to accommodate County representation can be easily made by EDC through by Implementation Timeline and Complexity An MOA would require less complexity in implementation by minimizing staff impact and reducing need to restructure existing EDC In order to successfully deliver Regional services through an MOA, there are several axes of consideration and analysis: City County EcDev Fee for service Services Development Services EDC County Purchase of Economic What it is Economic St. Thomas Corporation Development Providers Independent Service Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for Economic Development Services Option two is an MOA, where Elgin County purchases economic development services from the City’s Economic Development Corporawould require the clear delineation of services requested, and a significant consideration of impacts on County staff. Economic Elgin County Development A purchase of service agreement allows one party to outsource service provision of a key function to an outside organization. In this case, the County would be outsourcing economic development to the City of St. Thomas’ Economic Development Corporation (EDC). This would mean a relationship between the County and the EDC that mirrors that of the City and the EDC. Currently, the City provides the EDC with a budget of ~$643k (2021) to deliver its economic development services. 18 portunity for op and benefits day economic - on to - Key Benefits Potential Risks An MOA would provide opportunity for staff loaning or An MOA would allow the County and the City to establish a : : e n n i o l i t e a m n i i T d An MOA allows the County and the City to deliver services consistently r n : o o s i o t e C Streamlining and centralizing services through a single entity reduces a An MOA allows the County to expand its services, without significantly t m : : d s n o nWithout clear contract oversight set within County and an expansion to the Service efficiencies improve service impact, and reduce the downstream n c ne : oi : ta Through an MOA, the County’s direct involvement in day i t y a m ut s : t c l r i e nG l a Ol oi o a r f py p yb ft t pi t i i s E xmn m i v I I l ni E o l tV r a u c ac e e n d f c c t u m i i o e r o t i d v t i mi lo g rs o s o orh e e m Ssecondment, and would leverage the existing suite of services provided by the EDC; requiring less complex assessment and changeoi Sincreasing operational expenditure Cacross rural and urban communities, increasing clarity on the services available; and improving service reach through strengthened trust among business communities Peffects of taxes on residentsPduplicative effort, and improves service accessibility Rsingle point of contact for investors, and businesses requiring resources Ldevelopment shifts from direct delivery to one of contract oversight and relationship managementLEDC Board of Directors medium term risk mitigation - to - this option offers: Understanding the Implications of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)The benefits and tradeoffs of an MOA for regional economic development services are more balanced and present a more feasibleshared service. Overall, an MOA offers benefits similar to a membership approach, but notably allows for quicker implementatirealization Shorter implementation (and benefitrealization) timelinesBetter shortAn expansion of services at a rate that is lessthan the County’s current economicdevelopment operating expenditures yield many of same outcomes and the County and the City’s EDC would benefits as a Membership approach. A Memorandum of Agreement between However, our analysis demonstrates that 1.2.3. 19 Option 3: EDC Membership - 20 uring of the EDC uct recipients. The EDC currently provides a wide - evaluation Key Considerations - evaluating Suite of Services - Re Services provided through an integrated economic development function would need to reflect the diverse sector priorities of participants, and servicescope of services. Implementation Timeline and Complexity An EDC membership would require a more complex implementation landscape by requiring considerations and costs around staff impact and funding model re Stakeholder Comfort Moving to a membership model is more permanent and may be a model evolved to over time as the concept proves its value Degree of Governance Change Under a membership model, the corporation would have to be restructured to accommodate new member along with an update to bylaws and other governance documents The key considerations for an EDC Membership are similar to those of Option 2. Noted below are key areas of distinction. staff County EDC including Board integration City Economic development services; Development Corporation Elgin membership in the Economic What it is Economic St. Thomas Corporation Development Providers Independent Service EDC Membership and Functional Integration Option three is for Elgin County to become a member of the City’s Economic Development Corporation. This would entail a restrand would require consideration of several key factors (noted below). Economic Elgin County Development Typically, functional integration of services between two parties wouldmean either the creation of a new entity, or the revamping of an old entity that is mutually owned or governed by participating organizations to deliver services on their behalf. In the case of the County and the City, it would be the latter option, with the County becoming a member in the City’s Economic Development Corporation. - 21 - path forward. y. Overall, there are le unt Key Benefits Potential Risks evaluate a joint economic development function in the - Restructuring of EDC would be time consuming and create term commitment associated with membership, - : Stronger investment attraction through streamlined follow s : e n n i o l i te a m n i i T d r n o o i Creating a single source of truth and point of access for service o t : C a y t Leveraging each municipality’s strengths and resources available to support d c :n Opportunities to re n n g e : a e n tn i m t s r ro i e i l a s o t f p h n a f s g o E m i I e lt C i c r a r e e n M c u i g o ik o v n s s r g i o e e e Lunnecessary cost relative to the benefits to be achieved Rfuture are reduced given the longchallenging the ability to account for LMP, and community needs on a continuous basis Srecipients, and thus increasing clarity accessibility for community members Rregional development as a whole (e.g., developable land, and staff/talent expertise) Rup and engagement processes, as well as clarity on collective, regional opportunities benefits for investors …However, there are significant Understanding the Implications of County Membership in the EDC There are several key benefits and tradeoffs for consideration when assessing the feasibility of an EDC membership for the Cosignificant benefits, but the implications and tradeoffs compared to other options do not rank membership as the most favorab Risk minimization through proof of conceptperiod;Stakeholder comfort with degree ofchange; and,Implementation timelines and & time forbenefits realization implications to account for relating to: County Membership in the EDC would yield many benefits to both the County, and the City…1.2.3. 22 Kent Essex - |Windsor- |Chatham Appendix B: Jurisdictional Scan e 23 : s k d governance to a c a b w a side its ability to r D an integrated, ong ot being made in their best interest One side may feel like decisions arnRegional governance is difficult tomanage without local voices directlyinvolved •• Overview Assessment cal : The WEEDC’s governance model did not establish set s t i f e n There were no mutually agreed upon expectations and measures, e B iness and industry oard composition Strong representations from lobusApolitical in its management andBAmbassador for the entire region ••• Objective Setting:which created a disconnect in the relationship.Reporting Mechanisms:reporting mechanisms that involved all relevant parties. Essex County municipalities outsource their economic development functions to the WEEDC and provide funding to the corporation on a per capita basis. Employees are not county or city employees.In the past there has been controversy in the relationship due to the City being unsure of the value it was deriving from the corporation. At the time, WEEDC’s largest problems were:•• Centre Small Business 8 private sector reps A Corporate Model Between a County and City – t and CEO Business Board Expansion (WEEDC) Retention and Warden Essex President Essex County - Organization Structure Essex Economic Development Corporation (WEEDC) demonstrates the importance of clarity in strategy and objectives; an based economic development model. - - Marketing Investment Attraction & Windsor Mayor of Windsor Essex Economic Development Corporation Windsor The Windsorsuccessful joint venture among multiple municipalities. The success of WEEDC can be attributed to its broad service reach, aleffectively represent local community needs. This provides Elgin County and St. Thomas with a model to consider in assessing membership a 24 : s k tion because f economic c a ir economic b unicipal department uiding the direction w No independence as it ismLack of local business voicesg a the r D•• Overview Assessment The municipality’s Tourism department handles tourism ide voice and direction set by w - Each region in the County has two Economic Development Officers, : Kent’s economic development service began after amalgamation in 1998 and s - Kent was selected as a comparator for analysis and explora t i sures nothing is left behind - f e Regional approach is inclusive of the entire CountyTwo distinct areas for industry and small businessenCohesive Countythe municipality n e Separate from Tourism:promotion and resident attraction.Regional Focus:one to handle larger industries such as agriculture and manufacturing, and the otherto handle small businesses. B••• Chathamis delivered through the municipality. Some key characteristics are:•• South Officer house Model That Works for a Single Municipality - Officer Central Kent - Development 6. Community Small Business Centre North Officer 2 5. Manager 4. Kent: An In house model offers several good practices around a holistic servicing, addressing the needs and requirements o South Departments - Officer - Economic Development Organization Structure 3. Municipality of Chatham Officer Kent’s in Central - 2. Agriculture, 1. Manufacturing, IndustrialNorth 1 Officer Chatham Chathamdevelopment across different industries and small businesses. Chathamof their implementation of a holistic industry and small business focused approach, ensuring cohesion, and representation in development services 71122630 -- 864231 -- Ottawa Toronto 416613 Ottawa, ON K1P 1J9 strategycorp.com Toronto, ON M5C 2Y7 145 King Street East, 2nd Floor 100 rue Queen Street, Suite 850