2027-2030 Strategic Plan

In a way, this is supplemental to my previous post about priorities which have fallen off of the map. Instead, the recently released Strategic Plan ostensibly deals with the priorities that are still urgent or important. In the introduction to the Plan, Council notes: 

“What began as a series of conversations among elected officials evolved into a collaborative effort informed by a comprehensive review of the City’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges, discussions with Administration, and engagement with community partners. Throughout the process, Council members also drew upon the experiences, concerns, and ideas shared by residents during the election campaign and since taking office.”

This is followed by the City Manager’s endorsement of the plan, and then some guiding principles & criteria, and finally a S.W.O.T. Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats). The plan that follows is both broad and vague, which I assume is by design. Where the previous Council had six priorities, this one contains four that I’ll go through individually. Overall, I’d like to see more specificity when using terms like “vibrancy” and “community connection”, but there is much to be hopeful and optimistic about in here. Assuming they are adhered to, guiding principles like accountability and stewardship are great, and they have also noted open communication, long-term thinking, and fiscal discipline in the mix. I’m trying very hard to leave my typical cynicism aside here and take Council at face value. This is the document I have been waiting for, and it’s the aggregate of criteria to which I will hold them accountable. They’re literally telling us what they will do for the following three years, and it’s our job in October 2029 to look back and evaluate them on it.

https://www.medicinehat.ca/media/v15j013e/cmh-strategic-plan-2027-2030_online.pdf

Fiscal Responsibility

There is no surprise this is #1. There has been a lot of talk over the past few years about overspending, waste, bad financial decisions, tax and utility increases, licensing fees, and list goes on. Regardless of how objectively valid these concerns are, they are persistent and require attention. There is a group of people in the city - including, apparently, one sitting Councillor - who want to see a property tax freeze, zero-based budgeting, and no spending on anything they consider frivolous. This is absurd, and I have a feeling the Councillor is slowly learning that lesson. Moving back to the realm of reality, this Plan signals what can be summed in one word as austerity: “reduced reliance on reserves”, “reduce non-critical spending”, and “strategic investment in core services”. I won’t be at all surprised - despite being intensely disappointed - if we see a reduction or end to subsidized programs like Fair Entry, Rec & Ride, Esplanade kids’ programming, Hat Smart, etc. I’m also fairly certain we’ll see something akin to a hiring freeze and some level of micromanaging individual department budgets. 

Economic Growth Through Asset Expansion

Here’s the “red tape reduction” everyone campaigned on, promising “quicker approvals and development-ready land”. At the risk of my cynicism creeping in, haven’t we thought of that prior to this? I’d love to see more specificity around “red tape” talking points, which is something I said repeatedly in the campaign. What exactly are the barriers, how do they differ from other communities, and why have we been having this discussion for decades?

What’s not being explicitly said in this priority outline - but is mentioned in passing several times elsewhere - is AI. There are musings about a big data centre coming here or in the region, and as already explored, water security is already a concern. Later in the Governance section, there is a goal to “develop an AI and technology governance framework”, which I certainly hope happens sooner than later. I would hate to see us build the governance plane while we’re flying it. And I would hate for us to finally solve our “red tape” problem by rushing to open the doors to a data centre that could have generational impact in the name of a quick win or snake oil.

Organizational Effectiveness and Reliable Services

I’m slightly confused by this one, because in my mind it should already be our default operating mode. It’s fine to constantly be “improving how the organization works” and striving to have “departments collaborate better”, but I struggle to understand how this is a strategic priority that is new. The one opportunity I do see here is for the accountability piece (another one of those super popular but vague buzzwords in everyone’s campaign) to actually be implemented and subject to real metrics. 

There is talk of a public-facing KPI dashboard, although it’s only mentioned in passing in CAO Hutter’s opening statement and not in the body of the actual plan. I did note that in the Weaknesses section of the SWOT summary, there is the following: “Organizational complexity, fragmented data, and inconsistent performance reporting can restrict coordination and evidence- based decision-making across the organization.” I think this is one of many signals that performance metrics, KPIs, and defined outcomes are needed, or enhanced where they already exist. I’ve spent most of my career in private, profit-driven roles, and KPIs are where management has to live and die. Again, like this third goal writ large, this should already be the baseline for Council and Administrative operations.

Strong Community Connections

This is probably the most vague of the four priorities. Terms like “Strengthening community connections”, “positive civic pride”, and “meaningful engagement” are buzzy, broadly-defined, and wide-open for interpretation. I get that these plans are both overviews and living documents, but putting something like this out there requires detail, nuance, deliverables, action items, and intent. I think it’s easy for people to read this kind of priority with a healthy suspicion that it’s all lip service.

I feel the need to point something out in this context that’s been annoying me. It crept into myriad discussions on several subjects, but seemed the most pervasive around Division Ave and 3rd St. N. I’m confident any candidate would echo that they heard something very similar to this over and over - the idea that Council and Admin don’t listen to the public. One of the outcomes listed under this fourth priority reads, “Resident engagement is more consistent, and feedback better informs decisions.” So on one hand, here is Council committing to doing just that. But - and here’s where I have to be careful - we (the public) are absolutely never the best group to make a decision. As an aggregate, ‘we’ are not experts in anything. Individually, of course we all have our skillsets, education, and experience. But as a group, we often act like a mob. Look to any comment section of half-baked conspiracies for proof. 

There’s a difference between Council / Admin LISTENING to the public, and DOING THE THING the public wants. Often when people say, “[person / group] didn’t listen to us”, they actually mean, “[person / group] did something other than what we wanted.” That’s not the same thing, and I think we have to be more cognizant of the difference.

Summary

Okay, we’re still very much in the overview of this plan here, and I’ve written one of my longer posts already. After the four priorities are outlined, there is a breakdown by division: Governance, Corporate Services, Public Services, Development & Infrastructure and Energy Land & Environment. Each has explanatory mandates and context, followed by more specific goals that relate to the four priorities. This is where the meat of the work will get done, and where I expect there to be increasing clarity. Admin starts every request for decision and information brief by noting the background and strategic alignment of the matter at hand, and I expect this will continue. However, because the priorities are broadly defined, it’s easy to check a box. Accountability will be Council punching to make sure there is actual alignment and adherence to the decision making criteria outlined at the beginning.

I’m genuinely not shitting on this plan. As I said in the beginning, I think there is much to be optimistic about, and I’m happy to see language that reflects the feedback received during the election, the many surveys, and the public feedback from social media, regular media, and communication directly to Council. They’ve told us what they plan to do. I think the genuine test now will be if they do what they have told us they will, and if they put a metric framework into it so that we can evaluate them on data and deliverables instead of rumours and social media narratives.

Time to put your money where your mouth is,

- Adam