Closed meeting investigator Norm Gamble said he would consider changing his approach to investigations in light of concerns expressed by some councillors here about an investigation into an April 9 closed meeting of Mapleton council.
In a written report presented at the May 14 council meeting, Gamble concluded the April 9 closed session was conducted appropriately under the Municipal Act and the municipality’s procedural bylaw.
However, at the urging of some members of council, Gamble was asked to attend the May 28 council meeting to answer questions on the report.
At the May 28 meeting, councillor Neil Driscoll asked Gamble why he and other councillors, aside from Mayor Bruce Whale, were not interviewed as part of the investigation.
“As council members, we’re all involved,” said Driscoll, who wondered, “is that a complete investigation?”
Driscoll also noted he had been interviewed as part of a previous investigation of a 2011 closed meeting of Mapleton council. That meeting was also conducted appropriately, Gamble found.
Gamble replied he considers it a “judgment call” as to how much research is necessary in the course of an investigation, explaining he sometimes interviews entire councils and for other investigations “random councillors” and additional staff members are selected for interviews.
“From the outset, this investigation was very straightforward,” said Gamble, who also spoke by telephone with CAO Patty Sinnamon and local citizen Lori Woodham, who requested the investigation.
Gamble also reviewed the agenda and minutes of the April 12 meeting as part of his investigation.
“It’s a very complex issue that prompted the request (for an investigation), but the closed meeting investigation itself was very straightforward,” said Gamble. He added he provided his contact information to the municipality and requested it be passed on to all members of council in the event they wished to contact him.
“I was concerned that I wasn’t called, but now I understand I can contact you when there is an investigation underway,” said Driscoll.
Councillor Mike Downey asked if committee members are held to the same standards as councillors in regards to gatherings outside of regular meetings.
In his report, Gamble had cautioned council against informal gatherings that could be perceived as closed meetings.
The act says “council and committees,” Gamble explained.
Downey also asked how the investigator concluded there were no closed sessions of the Mapleton committee of adjustment in relation to the issue discussed in-camera on April 9.
Minutes of the April 9 meeting state council passed a motion waiving the notice requirement to hold a closed session to discuss “litigation or potential litigation, including matters before administrative tribunals, affecting the municipality or local board.”
Gamble explained he asked CAO Patty Sinnamon to contact the committee chair and relay the information to him.
“The clerk and the chair of the committee were quite clear there had not been a closed meeting of that committee recently,” said Gamble.
Councillor Andy Knetsch questioned the investigator’s decision not to interview the committee chair himself.
“It would seem that since you didn’t go directly the chair of the committee, because of that, all this becomes hearsay,” Knetsch stated.
“I appreciate your concerns,” Gamble replied. “Some of this is a judgment call and I guess from that I have to determine how much I need to go into for a meeting investigation. What I’m hearing from you and the rest of council is I should probably error on the side of doing more research.”
However, Gamble noted, the Municipal Act does not actually require an investigator issue a report when an investigation does not find a meeting was held improperly.
“The act only requires me to report on cases with errors and in this case there weren’t any,” he said, adding it has been his practice to issue reports on all investigations.
When asked at the May 14 session why Gamble did not initially present the report to council in person, Mayor Bruce Whale said there would be an additional cost to the municipality to have the investigator present the report in person.
An invoice for $350 for the investigation was approved for payment at the May 28 meeting.
“I am assuming we will receive another one for his attendance at council, as well as mileage,” Sinnamon said in an email to the Advertiser.
Gamble, who is also the closed meeting investigator for the County of Wellington and the other lower tier municipalities in the county, receives a fee of $350 per day and $175 per half-day.
