Citizen Briefing Note

Understanding the Fire Hall RFQUAL: What Has Already Been Decided—and What Has Not

Many Peachland residents are following discussions around a new fire hall and Protective Services Building. Much of the conversation now centers on a process called an RFQUAL, or Request for Qualifications. While this term sounds technical, it plays a significant role in shaping outcomes long before the public sees a final proposal.

An RFQUAL is a procurement tool used to identify developers or project teams that are qualified to participate in a future bidding process. At this stage, no contract is awarded and no final price is approved. From a legal standpoint, RFQUALs are considered administrative and pre-contractual.

However, from a governance perspective, RFQUALs are where many high-impact decisions quietly occur.

Through RFQUAL criteria, a municipality effectively determines:

• which delivery models are permitted
• which locations are viable
• what project scale and scope are assumed
• whether public-private partnerships are encouraged
• how much future council flexibility is constrained

By the time proposals are presented to the public, many alternatives have already been excluded.

In the case of Peachland’s fire hall, the RFQUAL embeds assumptions about land requirements, maximum municipal contribution, building size, and potential private-sector involvement. These are not merely technical matters—they are policy choices with long-term financial and governance implications.

RFQUALs are not improper or illegal. They are standard tools when used within clear policy direction and with transparent public explanation. Problems arise when politically decisive assumptions are embedded in procurement documents without explicit council debate or early public engagement.

The key principle is simple:

technical qualification belongs to staff; policy direction belongs to elected officials.

Residents are not questioning the need for a new fire hall. The issue is whether the path chosen is being shaped openly, with clarity about which decisions are administrative and which are political.

Understanding this distinction allows citizens to engage constructively—before momentum makes meaningful choice difficult.

Purpose of this note: