A discussion on management of the Bold Center has lead Lac La Biche County council to consider re-creating a regional recreation board.
William Barclay of Reynolds Mirth Richards & Farmer LLP law firm presented his opinions to council at last Tuesday’s council meeting on the merits of various management options, including leaving things as they are, setting up a county-run board or committee, or creating an arms-length non-profit company to run the facility. Each had their merits, said Barclay, but some made more sense for the county than others.
“Any of these structures can work, but there are advantages to all of them,” he said.
Some neighbouring communities with multiplex facilities have created non-profit companies – referred to as Chapter 9 companies – to run their facility, but those communities are operating under different circumstances than Lac La Biche County, he said, noting the facilities operated by third party companies are generally a joint operation between various municipalities.
Having one company that oversees the operations of the multiplex rather than numerous municipal administrations avoids problems if a liability issue should arise, he said.
In the case of the Bold Center, which is wholly owned by Lac La Biche County, creating a non-profit company could create more problems than it would solve, said Barclay, noting that in the past several years some non-profits have run into financial troubles.
“That’s primarily because proper controls were not put into place,” he said, stressing the importance of setting clear policy and guidelines for the overseeing body of the Bold Center, no matter what form it takes. A board of directors set-up to run the Bold Center could run into the same financial problems if given control of their own budget, noted Barclay. But there were also advantages, he said.
Setting up a board of directors offers an opportunity for more public participation, while having councillors also sitting on the board would keep the municipality involved.
One advantage of a board is being able to search out community members with skills or experience that complement those of the current council, while also taking some of the workload off council and at the same time appearing more democratic, said Barclay.
The important thing to keep in mind is the need for a clear mandate for the board with set expectations, he said. But having a board of community members could also create problems if the board and council have different views on an issue, something Barclay has seen happen before.
If council chose to set-up a board to oversee the Bold Center, or the recreation department, Barclay cautioned that financial control and ultimate decision making powers should rest with council to avoid problems.
“Otherwise things can go astray,” he said.
After the presentation, council expanded the discussion from the Bold Center to the entire recreation department, agreeing, without a formal motion, that a recreation board was something worth considering. Administration was tasked with compiling more information on setting up a recreation board, and council is expected to make their decision at an upcoming meeting.
