(rdnewsNOW file photo)

By rdnewsNOW staff

non-compliance instances

Red Deer County says independent investigation finds corruption allegations not substantiated

Jul 22, 2025 | 4:48 PM

While an independent investigation into allegations of corruption into Red Deer County’s public procurement practices were not substantiated, they did find a pattern of instances of non-compliance with the county’s internal procurement policies and procedures.

The investigation, led by KPMG Forensic Inc., looked into relationships, procurement and contracting processes involving county vendors. It also included a review of certain county tenders, agreements, general ledgers and purchasing and payment data.

The confidential report by KPMG was presented to council in a closed council meeting on July 21 at Red Deer County Centre.

The investigation focused on the fiscal years from 2019 to 2023 and in some instances, went as far back as 2014.

“After a very thorough investigation, we are pleased to finally be able to provide an open and transparent statement to our public that KPMG identifies the following deficiencies,” said Mayor Jim Wood, in a media release.

jaydyn lovelace

Man arrested for second time in a month after alleged attack in Gasoline Alley

15h ago

Community Message

Mayor Jefferies talks progress and hopes for the future at State of the City Address

16h ago

"rare opportunity for renters"

Rent in Red Deer up, despite Alberta topping provincial declines

16h ago

KPMG was retained by Red Deer County in December 2023 to examine several concerns brought to the attention of the county. In March 2024, the county says KPMG was retained by external legal counsel, Kingsgate Legal, on behalf of mayor and council to conduct an independent forensic investigation into certain allegations related to procurement, contracting and spending at Red Deer County.

Some of the allegations were found not to be true and some of the more serious ones were not substantiated.

However, KPMG did find a pattern of instances of non-compliance with the county’s internal procurement policies and procedures:

• Issuing verbal change orders where county policy required all change orders to be in writing.
• Not completing a process of independent market assessments on a series of works performed under a services agreement after having publicly committed to do so.
• Failing to communicate in the manner committed to in the tender documents.
• Using hourly rate pre-qualified vendors and standing offer agreements for work above the procurement value thresholds set out in county policy ($9,999 and $29,999 respectively) • Not adequately documenting and addressing potential conflicts of interest.
• Not adequately documenting delegations of signing authority when individuals were assuming an acting role in the absence of a county official and signing/authorizing beyond their delegated authority limits.
• Failing to include a required piece of work within the scope of certain public tenders resulting in the additional work subsequently being sole sourced to the original successful bidder.
• Underestimating the volume of works on some unit price tenders.
• Maintaining purchases below certain thresholds avoiding procurement processes that involved additional steps.
• Failing to accumulate volumes of business or failing to combine similar works.
• Failing to submit into county records certain quotes received, bid evaluations and scoring sheets on some public tenders and other procurements.
• Failing to prepare or maintain services contracts in several instances required under county policy.

“Council takes these findings by KPMG very seriously and looks forward to reviewing these findings with the Chief Administrative Officer on a path moving forward,” Mayor Wood added.

In addition, an allegation of spending exceeding the council approved budget on one large capital project was also reviewed. However, KPMG found the spending was in line with the budget approved by council.

It was in the fiscal year 2022 in which the budget was overspent by $23,266. This overspend was subsequently formally reported and the variance report accepted by council as part of the Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Variance Report.