Montgomery rejects Retail Strategies contracts after members cite insufficient results and confidential data concerns

Montgomery’s Economic Development Corporation and city council voted on July 1 to reject two professional services agreements with Retail Strategies LLC: one for a Downtown Strategies program and a second for retail recruitment.

The votes followed a presentation from a Retail Strategies representative and a lengthy discussion among council and EDC members about whether the firm’s work had produced measurable results, and whether confidential prospect lists distributed to the EDC that day allowed the city to assess performance.

Retail Strategies consultant Neil (Retail Strategies representative) described the firm’s outreach and marketing tools, including trade-area maps generated from mobile tracking (he said one map was run from Kroger data), drive-time polygons, leakage analysis and quarterly business reports. Neil said the firm typically follows a retailer from “conceptualization of their land to opening” and that the full process can take about three years. He told the group: “People are coming to us. They’re coming — I’m getting direct emails. Our engineers are getting directly contacted as well.”

Council and EDC members pressed for proof that Retail Strategies’ work had generated the inquiries the city had recently received. Several speakers said they had just received a confidential list of prospective brands the same day and could not verify whether the firm’s outreach had produced those leads or whether developers and local engineers were contacting retailers independently. One council member summarized the group’s concern as having “been 10 months in the dark” about measurable outcomes.

Members also discussed the city’s rapid growth and whether outside recruitment remained necessary. Speakers noted Montgomery is in “hypergrowth,” that nearby jurisdictions are under water moratoria and that some developers and brokers are already assembling retail projects and reaching out to tenants without the city’s recruitment contract. Several council members said they wanted time to compare the confidential list Retail Strategies provided with internal inquiry lists from city engineers and developers before deciding whether to continue funding the contract.

Financial and timeline details discussed during the meeting included a $45,000 next-round funding item for Retail Strategies’ retail recruitment work and an estimated downtown implementation figure discussed in the meeting of about $90,000 for work identified by the Downtown Strategies portion. Staff and council members said the original contract began in August (10 months earlier) and that Retail Strategies had promised a “quick win” in the first year that members said had not materialized.

Some members argued for keeping the downtown-focused work because it included tangible, near-term items such as façade-matching grants, volunteer “boots-on-the-ground” committees and business retention and expansion support the city could implement relatively quickly; others said the city already had staff and community volunteers who could carry out much of that work without a third-party consultant if the city agreed on priorities. Staff member Stephanie (city staff) described the downtown plan as staged (data, then implementation, then business retention and expansion) and said the second-year implementation work would require staff time and volunteer coordination.

After debate the board took two formal votes. A motion to reject the professional services agreement for Downtown Strategies (item 5) was made by Mister Chilowicz and seconded by Mister Walker; the chair called the ayes and the motion carried. Later, a motion to reject the professional services agreement for retail recruitment (item 6) was made by Mister Olson and seconded by another member; the ayes carried and the motion passed. The council then adjourned.

Votes at a glance

- Item 5 — Professional services agreement between the Montgomery Economic Development Corporation and Retail Strategies LLC for Downtown Strategies: Motion to reject carried (mover: Mister Chilowicz; second: Mister Walker). Note: rejection ends the city’s planned downtown consulting engagement under this agreement as presented.

- Item 6 — Professional services agreement between the Montgomery Economic Development Corporation and Retail Strategies LLC for retail recruitment: Motion to reject carried (mover: Mister Olson; second: not specified). Note: rejection ends the retail recruitment contract as presented; the EDC/council discussed the possibility of revisiting the matter after reviewing confidential lists and additional performance information.

What’s next

Members asked staff to reconcile the confidential prospect list Retail Strategies provided with the city’s own inquiry records (engineers' and developers' lists) and suggested the EDC should review the materials at its July meeting and then refer to council if further action is recommended. Several members noted the city might need an executive session to review confidential prospect lists; staff also noted an August deadline (Friday, Aug. 18) for any replacement or renewed contract to meet the summer timeline discussed in the meeting.

The meeting closed with the council adjourning after the votes.