Comment
Everything. Everywhere. All at once.
It’s a lot. Waterworks. A new McFarland Home. And about 100 decaying public buildings. Each file has a price tag of more than $100 million. Add to this list municipal ambitions to build affordable housing. To make every County road smooth. To build a new hospital. To pay doctors. To modernize the fire service. To expand the capacity of Shire Hall. It’s a lot.
The cost of government has grown fivefold since this municipality was formed. The population, meanwhile, has remained flat. Yet Shire Hall’s ambition widens. Some say it is necessary to make up for past neglect. Others note that costs will only go up—better to pay now than put off until tomorrow. But how far does that reasoning go? Is there a limit to municipal spending? Is any ambition too great? Too risky? May Shire Hall double your taxes? Triple them? Or more? Same for your water bills? When is enough enough?
They are serious questions. I truly hope readers will tell us what they think they can bear. How much can they endure? Our limits will be tested in the next few years.
Shire Hall is placing big bets, laying out big money, and passing along big tax increases because it believes elected council and residents are complicit in its ambition. If true, those urging restraint, including this columnist, are howling into the wind.
However, if residents feel squeezed by rising costs—taxes, water bills, fees, and charges—then the prospect of crazy expensive ambition triggers anxious discussions around the dinner table. Can I afford to live here anymore? When will we have to cash out? For many residents, Shire Hall ambition represents an existential threat to their lives in Prince Edward County.
Something must give.
Big ambition is exciting. The thrill of building something new—of making something big and bold—can be exhilarating. The payoff can be enormous. Careers are made of such ambition.
But when serious investors look at big ambitions, they must first understand the execution risk. Can the organization do what it says it wants to do? Grand talk and bold proclamations of glorious futures are worthless unless and until investors are convinced the organization is sufficiently competent to manage the myriad risks and reach the finish line. (To be clear, you and I are the investors in this metaphor.)
Serious investors test execution risk thoroughly. They work through a detailed checklist: Does the organization have a track record on a similar project? Similar scale? Similar risk? Similar investment? Does senior management have the expertise and experience to do this? Have they demonstrated the capacity and capability to do what they say they want to do? Do they have a competitive advantage that may differentiate them from every other big ambition organization like them? Is there clear and quantifiable customer demand for the big ambition?
If the answer is no—or even wobbly on any of these questions—it will always be a hard pass.
Can we say that Shire Hall meets these tests? The County has never embarked on a single project of this magnitude in its entire history—let alone a half dozen all at once. There is no legacy knowledge or institutional memory to lean upon.
Does Shire Hall have the expertise and experience to pull this off? No one in Shire Hall has built waterworks infrastructure on this scale. $100 million? $200 million? The truth is we don’t even know the outside cost of their ambition. The job of procuring, managing, overseeing and commissioning such vast projects is in the hands of folks who have never worked at this scale. They must rely heavily on consultants and third parties for the expertise they lack. It creates intolerable and frightening blind spots.
Nor is it clear that Shire Hall, or anyone within its walls, has the demonstrated experience to drive hardball negotiations with large-scale, big-league developers. They are familiar—occasionally overwhelmed—with the local cadre of builders and developers who may construct a few dozen homes each year. Few, if any, have the decades-long experience needed to go toe-to-toe with big, agile and motivated developers—folks who build hundreds of homes each year with serious money at stake. It’s not a fair fight. And the risks are mind-boggling.
Does Shire Hall have a competitive advantage? Does it have a funding angle? Does it have a line on government funds to backstop its competency and experience weakness? To reduce costs? To mitigate risk?
If any exists, it isn’t apparent.
And finally, has Shire Hall proven that the market is ready for its big ambitions? The sum total of its market analysis appears to be informed by assurances from developers. It is hardly the independent, rock-solid research a serious investor demands.
Sure, folks want better roads, town halls and affordable housing. But at any price?
Even if you accept that residents will pay for nice things, you must still overcome the execution risk. Simply put, Shire Hall has taken on way too much. It has assumed too much potential peril on your behalf.
Shire Hall lacks the experience, qualifications, expertise, or any particular skill set that might enable it to navigate the adventure it has embarked upon. All it has is a compliant tax base—willing to pay for its missteps. For now.
Comments (0)