Collingwood Council defers receipt of Collus, CPU agreement review

By Paul Brian Collingwood Enterprise-Bulletin

At its Jan. 5 session Collingwood Town Council deferred receipt of a Service Agreement Review on Collingwood Public Utilities (CPU).

The review claims the need for clearer definition of services, increased management transparency and various improvements in the existing agreement between CPU and Collus Powerstream Solutions Corp.

Marcus Firman, Chief Operation Officer for Water/Wastewater with CPU called some parts of the review by Rienk de Vries and Sandy Scott of True North Consultants, Inc. “incorrect and misleading” and said further clarification of various concerns brought up in the review is required.

In his presentation to council, de Vries said that the existing agreement between CPU and Collus (whose status as to whether being in effect or not is legally unclear) was “not working well enough for the Town of Collingwood,” and does not clearly represent the actual service relationship between CPU and Collus.

According to de Vries’ presentation the report is based on documentation, interviews with key stakeholders, observation and analysis of various external sources of comparative data.

Although he said the review should not be taken as a “negative slam” of the passionate and good work being done by employees, but instead as a way to move forward in a positive direction, de Vries did outline various findings that caused him concern.

For one de Vries said that even appearances of any potential conflict of interest which were found to exist in the agreement need to be avoided.

“In theory you could have the person developing the invoice paying the invoice,” de Vries said of the agreement’s financial governance, adding that there’s a need to “increase the Town’s administrative transparency and oversight.”

De Vries also said that due to confusing multiple agreements and various factors which made the agreement not easily comparable to provincial median costs it was hard to determine if the agreement gives good value for money.

“This does not mean that the services delivered were not good,” he said. “We just can’t tell.”

De Vries said the current agreement is outdated and includes provision of numerous services to CPU which are not actually provided. The review stated that 18 services and one activity were promised of which only 10 were delivered. That claim is something Firman firmly disputed. He said all services listed in the agreement had been completed at some time in the past and benefitted the town.

De Vries further said that the purchase of 50% of Collus’ parent company by Powerstream Inc. in 2012 had affected the agreement in ways which were not updated in the agreement.

Among other recommendations for clarity and improvement of the management structure, de Vries concluded by recommending that council provide notice of the current agreement’s expiration to Collus before June 1, 2015 such that it expire by Jan. 1, 2016 and be succeeded by a new agreement.

Councillor Kevin Lloyd took exception to the report saying it was “rife with errors” and that Collus hadn’t been properly consulted on the parts of the report concerning it. Lloyd recommended that it not be received, while Councillor Cam Ecclestone acknowledged he needed more time to understand the “complex” report.

Councillor Deb Doherty said that while all the “minutiae” of the report might not be agreed upon its intent was helpful and would move the town toward betterment and clarity with regard to its relationship with Collus.

Councillor Bob Madigan moved to have the report deferred for one month until the CEO and President of Collus Ed Houghton had a chance to look it over.

“I don’t want to see us drawing battle lines here,” remarked Deputy-Mayor Brian Saunderson, initially expressing some reservation about Madigan’s motion, though ultimately voting in favour.

All present voted in favour of Madigan’s motion save a sole no vote from Doherty for a vote of 5-2. Councillors Kathy Jeffery and Tim Fryer were not present.