Mississauga Council is poised (once again) to deny its citizens access (once again) to the Ontario Ombudsman.
December 7th, 2009
Last Wednesday, I was at the last day of “Sharpen Your Teeth with Advanced Investigative Training” which is, according to the Ontario Ombudsman’s press release, “an intensive 3 ½-day training course devoted to planning, conducting, writing and releasing major administrative and oversight investigations, based on the proven and highly effective methodology used by the Special Ombudsman Response Team… The course is targeted at managers and staff who conduct investigations at ombudsman offices and similar oversight agencies.”
And BOY was it ever!
But being there also meant that I missed last Wednesday’s General Committee meeting and especially a chance to oppose:
Item 3, “Renewal of the Investigator Services Agreement between the Corporation of the City of Mississauga and Local Authorities Services Limited (“LAS”) with respect to closed meeting Investigator Services.”
Yep. City of MYTHissauga Staff churned out a Corporate Report that recommended Council appoint Local Authorities Services Limited (a subsidiary corporation of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario) and their municipally hand-selected municipal-approved “investigators” for the next two years.
But what City of MYTHissauga Staff are actually recommending is that the Mayor and Councillors deny citizens a free, independent investigation into closed-door meetings by the Ontario Ombudsman!
Again, I wasn’t there last Wednesday, but I bet Mississauga Council rubber-stamped Item 3. The only thing I’m not sure about is whether they beat Councillor Pat Saito’s previous Avoid-the-Ontario-Ombudsman rubber-stamping record of 16 seconds.
So Wednesday, I’m giving a deputation hoping to convince Mississauga Council to do what the Town of Fort Erie did. That meant reworking a video that I uploaded to YouTube back on December 11, 2007 if for no other reason than to take advantage of YouTube’s High Quality feature not available back then.
The transcript of this video will be presented to Mississauga Council for inclusion in the December 9, 2009 minutes.
Once again, thank you to the Mayor and Councillors of the Town of Fort Erie for doing Right by your residents back on December 10, 2007 and for giving me a Voice two days from now that I would otherwise not have.
Video: “FORT ERIE APPOINTS THE ONTARIO OMBUDSMAN AND SHINES THE *LIGHT* (8:52 min)
(Click here to go directly to the clip on YouTube
TOWN OF FORT ERIE COUNCIL MEETING December 10, 2007 TRANSCRIPT
MAYOR DOUGLAS G. MARTIN:
[Inaudible] Councillor Whitfield.
COUNCILLOR TIM WHITFIELD:
Thank you, Your Worship. I’d like to move that we permit consideration of the closed-meeting investigator issue immediately.
MAYOR DOUGLAS G. MARTIN:
Is there a seconder for that? Councillor Lockwood. All those in favour? Opposed. That is carried.
I believe that the recommendation has been tabled from the floor. The recommendation was to go with LAS —I believe is the recommendation. So I think what we will have to do is then if you wish that would be the motion on the floor —again. And that if you wish to go with the Ombudsman, we’ll defeat the first motion and we’ll have another motion to go with the Ombudsman.
So, speakers to the motion.
[SOMEONE ON STAFF SPEAKING]
Pardon me?
The motion will be put to table —motion back on the floor. Councillor Whitfield, Seconder, Councillor Schuler. All those in favour. Opposed. That’s carried. Councillor Whitfield.
COUNCILLOR TIM WHITFIELD:
Thank you, Your Worship. I won’t be supporting the tabled motion tonight.
The information that we received from the Ombudsman, I found to be very informative. It answered a lot of my questions and it made it a lot easier for me to make a decision on this.
I agree that we should take advantage of any funding —provincial wherever possible. I’m confident that the Ombudsman is capable of providing a fair and just decision in a timely manner. So I won’t be, pardon me, I won’t be supporting the motion to enter into an agreement with LAS.
MAYOR DOUGLAS G. MARTIN:
Councillor Whitfield, just for Council’s clarification on this, the recommendation that is on the floor is that [inaudible] “to enter into an agreement with Local Authority Services Limited for a period of two years to act as the Town investigator for closed meetings effective January 1, 2008.”
The was the motion that was tabled and that is the motion that is now on the floor.
Councillor Noyes.
COUNCILLOR ANN-MARIE NOYES:
Thank you. Mayor Martin, I’m also not going to be supporting that motion again for all the reasons that Councillor Whitfield gave. I will say that in all the correspondence that I’ve had with the Ombudsman’s Office in the last week, you know, they’ve responded very timely. And I think coming down here was [inaudible] Above and Beyond. But I think it really helped all of us make up our minds.
The one thing that —not that we can do anything about it, is that I was a bit concerned about the comment made by the Ombudsman in regards to that they had asked to be present at the AMO Conference to be able to basically give us —all the delegates an opportunity of listening to the Ombudsman’s Office. And they were denied that opportunity.
As much as I appreciate all that AMO does, I think it’s a wonderful organization —I think they miss-stepped on that one. I think the more information, the better and I think that was a miss-step on their part.
MAYOR DOUGLAS G. MARTIN:
Councillor Schuler? Councillor Steckley.
COUNCILLOR RICHARD SHULER:
Yeah, I too want to just repeat what Councillor Noyes’ remarks there.
As the Ombudsman was here, I alluded to the fact that shame on AMO for not giving all the information. Our people went there, came away with the strategy predicated on what was presented. And I don’t think they were given all the information to effectively bring back what we needed to have back.
I thought the Ombudsman was very impressive. He, as Councillor Whitfield said, he answered all of our concerns. And that any municipality that has not made a decision and didn’t have the benefit of hearing what he had to say, they missed out on something.
So at this point in time, I think it’s a no-brainer. The question being called, the motion before us will be defeated and that we will go forward with full confidence with the Ombudsman.
COUNCILLOR BOB STECKLEY:
Thank you, Mayor Martin. I was for the Ombudsman right from the start and I’m very happy that Council took the time and the effort to debate this decision —although we’ve taken some heat in the press on it that we’ve debated too long.
I would rather debate longer and come to the right decision than rush to a wrong decision as the press put it. So I’m very happy that the Ombudsman came. [inaudible] actually had some interesting comments. And there are things that I hadn’t actually considered so I appreciate Council taking the time and making the offer to him and I appreciate his effort in coming down.
I too will be against the motion tonight.
MAYOR DOUGLAS G. MARTIN:
Councillor Annunziata?
COUNCILLOR SANDY ANNUNZIATA:
Thank you, Your Worship. I was very impressed with Mr. Marin and his candour the workings of his Office. There’s one quote in his 2007 report and it’s simply put. It says, “Public Trust is the necessary currency of good government” and that just struck me. That struck a chord within me.
So I will be not in support of the tabled motion. I will caution Staff and Council that this is a process —this is new ground, new territory for the Ombudsman’s Office and he is charged with some other serious concerns. Like the OLG. Like MPAC. Like FRO.
So I think this is going to be a learning experience for everyone going forward and I look forward to the response —a timely response that we get from the Ombudsman.
MAYOR DOUGLAS G. MARTIN:
Any further [inaudible]. Seeing no one, I just have a quick comment as well that I will be supporting the use of the Ombudsman and defeating the motion as it stands and supporting the next motion for a variety of reasons.
Number One, I think that in the past, we have in this Council and in past Councils [inaudible] and I think every Council that I’ve seen has done due diligence and the fact that, they have conducted themselves properly.
We have nothing to fear at all about going into a closed session meeting because we have the information that’s provided to us is accurate and is precise. And we get good guidance by Staff here, to make sure that we are aware of what we are going into closed session and why we are going to be there. And follow the laws to a T.
That’s why I have no fear of anyone investigating anything that this Council has done either here or in the past as well. Because I think we have conducted ourselves appropriately and properly. So I have no fear of having the Ombudsman coming.
The other thing is that if we went with LAS and they find in favour of the Council, there would always be that suspicion out there that they are doing that just to suck up to the Council. And this way here, this is the Ombudsman who would be coming forward, as he said, quite independent, and I think that we are confident in the information we have. And confident in the decisions we make, we have nothing to fear at all.
So the only thing I do find ironic though is as Councillor Steckley says, is that it’s the first time that certain members of the press have criticized us for doing the due diligence, for doing the work —you know, patting ourselves on the back for having him come down here, was I think the appropriate thing.
Because I was not supportive at the time of having the Ombudsman because, some of the information and some of the comments he made I didn’t think were appropriate. Having him come down and having him give a better explanation as to what his Office does and how it will be handled —and the fact that any decision that will come back is not to challenge the decision that was made in closed session but simply to address whether we had the legal right within the Act to go into closed session.
I think that’s important.
So I will also be not supporting the motion on the floor [inaudible] the second motion.
A motion’s on the floor. All those in favour? All those opposed? It is defeated. Councillor Whitfield. You have a [inaudible]
COUNCILLOR TIM WHITFIELD:
Thank you, Your Worship. Moved by myself, seconded by Councillor Shuler, “That The Municipal Town of Fort Erie hereby consents to the use of the Office of the Ombudsman for the investigation of any closed meetings in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act, 2001.” Submitted.
MAYOR DOUGLAS G. MARTIN:
That motion is on the floor. Any questions to that —just for members of Council’s information, we don’t have to do this. We don’t have to put a motion on the floor because effective January 1st it would automatically go to the Ombudsman but it sends a clear message that this is a decision of Council.
All those in favour? Opposed? That is carried.
Any other New Business to be brought forward?…
Signed,
The (I loved typing this out) Mississauga Muse
Post Linx
Permalink |
|
Print This Article
Comments
Leave a Reply
You do not have to leave your real name, email address, or website to comment. Thanks to despicable spammers, however, comments must be reviewed before publication.
If you prefer, you can send a private comment to the Mississauga Muse.