Council has appointed John E. Craig as the town’s integrity commissioner to investigate an alleged breach of the municipal code of ethics.
In a show of hands on July 22, four councillors voted in favour of the move.
They included councillors Barb Tocher, Deb Callaghan, John Brennan and Josie Wintersinger.
At this point no details have been released regarding the member of council involved, nor the nature of the alleged breach of the code of conduct.
The item was originally on the July 16 agenda, but due to the meeting length was brought forward for discussion on July 22 with an updated report from CAO/town manager Kathryn Ironmonger.
Her report recommended that the CAO be directed to engage the services of John Craig as the town’s integrity commissioner for the purposes of responding to the complaint received by the municipality on July 4.
In March, the town adopted a code of ethics policy which required the appointment of an integrity commissioner to enforce the code according to the provisions of the Municipal Act.
Though reporting to council, the commissioner’s role would be to investigate, in an independent manner, complaints regarding alleged breaches of the code.
According to the policy, the CAO/town manager is required to let council know a formal complaint was received and forwarded to the commissioner.
The Municipal Act, 2001, provides the authority for the municipality to appoint an integrity commissioner who reports to council and who is responsible for receiving inquiries, requests for clarification and complaints with regard to ethical behaviour of members of council and of local boards of the municipality.
Ironmonger’s report stated the financial impact will depend on the amount of time it takes to respond to the complaint and to conduct the investigation in accordance with the Municipal Act for investigating the alleged breach of the code of ethics.
A final report of the integrity commissioner will be provided to the complainant and the member no later than 90 days after the making of the complaint.
If during the investigation process, the complaint is withdrawn or resolved the commissioner shall report to council outlining the findings, the terms of any resolution and any recommended action within 30 days.
If upon completion of the investigation the integrity commissioner finds that a breach of the code has occurred, the commissioner shall report the findings to council, including a recommendation as to the imposition of a penalty as set out in the Municipal Act.
Depending on the breach, penalities could include:
– a reprimand;
– having the member repay or reimburse monies received;
– having the member return the property or item, or reimburse the value;
– a request for the member to apologize to council, the complainant or both;
– suspension of remuneration paid to the member for a period of up to 90 days;
If upon completion of the investigation, the commissioner finds that there has been no contravention of the code, or that a contravention occurred, however, the member took all reasonable measures to prevent it, or the contravention committed was trivial or committed through inadvertence or an error in judgment made in good faith, the commissioner shall set this out in a report to council.
The policy also states that the commissioner’s report(s) shall be made available to the public.
Even before council had a chance to review the report in public session, Mayor Lou Maieron wanted to defer the matter until August.
In the approval of agenda including the CAO’s revised report addressing the appointment of the integrity commissioner, he questioned the late arrival of that information, despite being told that the information was emailed to council members late last week.
Maieron countered that he was having issues with his email account.
“This is the first time I’m seeing this,” the mayor said.
As such, he said he was working off the previous agenda which had not cited a specific individual for the commissioner position.
Maieron considered the change significant.
He questioned the process, and wanted to proceed with the previous report which directed the CAO to secure the services of a commissioner for a two-year term. Maieron contended the choosing of that person doesn’t fall upon the CAO.
Brennan countered that what was being discussed at that point was simply whether or not to accept the updated report from the CAO.
“It doesn’t say what we are going to do with it.”
Maieron countered that there is a recommendation.
Brennan clarified, “We say what we do with the report. The only difference is that there is a name now.”
Maieron wanted the CAO to come back with a series of names, their credentials, lists of potential costs and their availability in a report which could be discussed by council in mid-August.
He said decisions regarding the choice should be left to council instead of in the hands of the CAO.
Councillor Barb Tocher suggested that be discussed when the item came up on the agenda.
When it came to a vote, Tocher, Callaghan, Brennan and Wintersinger voted to amend the agenda while Maieron voted against.
As the item arose in discussion, Maieron again argued that it should be council making the decisions with staff making recommendations.
“I think the field of candidates should be greater than one and it should come before council to review the credentials and potential costs.”
He wanted to see a minimum of three choices presented to council and saw no reason why this could not be presented at the Aug. 13 meeting.
“It would be more in line with what other councils were doing.”
Tocher responded, “In a perfect world I would agree with you Mr. Mayor. But the council code of ethics (conduct) was passed in March. It is now July. It’s been four months and we’ve had ample opportunity to deal with it – and did not – for whatever reason.”
She also pointed out that a complaint has been launched and there is a time limit (90 days) to deal with the item.
“I think we need to move forward expeditiously in order to not compromise the complaint which has been filed.”
Tocher also believed that the CAO did her homework investigating candidates regarding pricing, availability and experience.
Councillor Brennan also pointed out the appointment was to deal with the complaint lodged on July 4, 2013 to investigate the alleged breach.
“We’re not hiring this person as our integrity commissioner (for the two-year term), it’s simply for this one job.”
Brennan said the intent was to hire this person for a specific complaint, and then look at hiring someone for a two-year term, based on the criteria which the mayor had suggested earlier.
Councillor Wintersinger also shared that interpretation of what was presented.
Ironmonger’s report stated that a final report must be presented no later than 90 days after the complaint was lodged.
Maieron agreed that if council waited until August, 40 days would have elapsed.
He asked if the items could be merged and have the CAO present a report for the two year term.
Tocher said they are two issues.
When it came to the resolution to hire Craig as the integrity commissioner to deal with the July 4 complaint, only four hands raised to vote in favour of the move.
The bylaw later passed by council, authorized the signing of the agreement to hire the integrity commissioner.