Raise the Standard #2: City Services Should Be Measurable

Residents should know what level of service they can reasonably expect from their City.

Whether someone is reporting an issue, waiting for information, applying for a permit, navigating a municipal process or simply trying to understand what happens next, the experience should not feel uncertain or open-ended.

Good government is not only about what services a municipality provides.

It is also about how reliably, efficiently and transparently those services are delivered.

That is the focus of my second Raise the Standard commitment.

Residents should know what to expect

When someone contacts the City, there should be clarity around some basic questions:

Was my request received?

Who is responsible for it?

What happens next?

How long should this stage normally take?

And what happens if the expected timeline is missed?

Not every issue can be resolved immediately.

Some files are more complicated than others. Infrastructure concerns may require technical review. Permit and planning processes can involve multiple departments or outside agencies. Emergencies, seasonal demand and staffing pressures can also affect timelines.

But uncertainty should not be the default.

Where appropriate, key resident-facing services should have clear, measurable and publicly communicated service standards.

The tangible deliverable: a City Service Standards & Performance Scorecard

As Councillor, I would work to establish a public City Service Standards & Performance Scorecard for key resident-facing services.

The idea is straightforward.

Residents and Council should be able to see:

Service
What service or process is being measured?

Expected standard
What response, processing or resolution expectation applies?

Actual performance
How is the service actually performing?

Percentage meeting the standard
How consistently is the target being achieved?

Trend
Is performance improving, stable or declining?

Outstanding or overdue cases
How many requests have moved beyond the expected standard?

Action underway
If performance is consistently falling short, what is being done about it?

This information should not be buried in lengthy reports.

It should be easy to understand at a glance.

Why a scorecard matters

Without measurement, it is difficult to know whether a delay is an isolated experience or part of a broader service problem.

A scorecard would allow residents and Council to see patterns.

If one service is consistently meeting its target and another is regularly falling behind, that matters.

If a new process or technology improves turnaround times, we should be able to see that too.

And if performance continues to fall short, Council should be asking why.

Is the issue staffing?

Is the process unnecessarily complicated?

Is demand increasing faster than capacity?

Are systems not communicating with each other?

Are applications or requests frequently incomplete?

Different problems require different solutions.

Measurement helps us solve the right problem.

The second deliverable: a clear Service Resolution Pathway

Publishing a service standard is only useful if residents also know what happens when that standard is not met.

That is why I would pair the scorecard with a clearer Service Resolution Pathway.

The principle is simple:

Residents should not have to repeatedly restart the conversation because a service request has gone beyond its expected timeline.

A reasonable process could include:

1. Request logged

The resident receives confirmation that the request has been received, along with a reference number and the responsible service area.

2. Expected standard communicated

Where a service standard exists, the resident should know what the normal response or processing expectation is.

3. Status update

If the matter remains open as that expected timeline approaches, the resident should receive an update rather than having to chase for information.

4. Internal escalation

When an expected service standard is exceeded, the matter should be flagged internally.

5. Explanation and next step

The resident should receive a plain-language explanation of why the matter remains outstanding and what the next expected step is.

6. Further review for prolonged delays

Where an issue remains unresolved beyond an established escalation point, there should be a clearly identified next level of review.

7. Missed standards become part of the data

Repeated delays should not disappear into individual email chains.

They should help inform the performance data used to identify where improvement is needed.

My first action

Within my first 100 days, I would ask staff to report back on creating a public City Service Standards & Performance Scorecard, paired with a consistent process for escalating and communicating requests that move beyond established service standards.

That report should identify:

• which key resident-facing services already have measurable standards;

• where clear standards are missing;

• what performance data is already being collected;

• which measures could reasonably be reported publicly;

• how residents are currently updated when expected timelines are missed;

• what escalation processes already exist;

• where gaps remain;

• and how a simple public-facing scorecard and resolution pathway could be implemented.

That gives Council a clear starting point.

And once the baseline is established, residents can measure what happens next.

What this could look like in practice

The scorecard should eventually allow residents to look at a City service and understand something like:

Service: Permit review
Expected standard: X
Actual performance: X
Requests meeting standard: X%
Trend: Improving / Stable / Declining

Or:

Service: Bylaw inquiry
Expected standard: X
Actual performance: X
Requests meeting standard: X%
Trend: Improving / Stable / Declining

Or:

Service: Parks or infrastructure service request
Expected standard: X
Actual performance: X
Requests meeting standard: X%
Trend: Improving / Stable / Declining

The exact standards should reflect the realities of each service.

The important part is that they are defined, measured and reported.

This is not about promising that everything will be fast

Some municipal issues are complicated.

Some will take time.

Some depend on other levels of government, utilities, contractors or outside agencies.

A meaningful service standard should not pretend otherwise.

The expectation I am setting is different:

Residents should know what is happening.

They should know what they can reasonably expect.

They should receive an update when something falls outside that expectation.

And Council should be able to see when missed expectations become a pattern.

Why this matters

Residents pay for municipal services.

They should be able to understand how those services are performing.

For residents, greater clarity means less time wondering whether a request disappeared into the system.

For businesses, it means greater predictability.

For City staff, better performance information can help identify where process, technology or capacity improvements are needed.

And for Council, it provides better evidence when making decisions about budgets, staffing and service levels.

Accountability is stronger when it is built around evidence instead of anecdotes.

What I can be accountable for

One Councillor cannot personally control the response time of every City department.

I will not pretend otherwise.

What I can commit to is bringing greater transparency and accountability to the system.

I can ask what standards currently exist.

I can push for clearer standards where they are missing.

I can ask that performance be reported publicly.

I can push for a clearer process when established service standards are missed.

I can ask why a service is repeatedly falling behind.

And I can report back on what has changed and what still needs improvement.

Those are actions residents can measure.

Raise the Standard

This is Standard #2 of my Raise the Standard commitments.

Each standard asks the same four questions:

What should the standard be?

What will I do?

How will it be measured?

How will I report back?

For City services, my commitment is:

Set the expectation.

Measure the performance.

Resolve what falls behind.

Report the results.

The tangible deliverables are a public City Service Standards & Performance Scorecard and a clearer Service Resolution Pathway for requests that move beyond established expectations.

Residents should not have to guess what kind of service they can expect from their City.

And they should not have to repeatedly chase City Hall simply to find out what happens next.

That is part of raising the standard.

Olivia