ERIN – The Town of Erin has been named the most secretive municipality in the country by four journalism organizations, largely for its efforts to deny Freedom of Information requests from the Wellington Advertiser.
The announcement was made on Feb. 24 by the Canadian Association of Journalists, the Centre for Free Expression (CFE) at Ryerson University, News Media Canada and Canadian Journalists for Free Expression.
The award – the Code of Silence Award for Outstanding Achievement in Government Secrecy – went to Erin because the municipality has ignored or refused media interview requests, kept important meetings and decisions quiet from the media and, most glaringly, refused for two years to release details of severance payments made to staff over a specified time period.
“Erin refused these requests and Erin Mayor Allan Alls told the media they would not release these details unless forced to by the commission,” reads the citation in the announcement by the CFE.
The annual award intends to draw attention to government and public agencies that “put extra effort into denying public access to government information to which the public has a right under access to information legislation,” according to information on CFE website.
Past winners of the secrecy award include former Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the RCMP, and agencies like Ontario Hydro.
The Town of Erin, nominated by the Advertiser, beat out the following “honourable mentions” this year: North Bay; Cornwall; Cranbrook, BC; Morinville, Alberta; and Côte-Saint-Luc, Quebec.
Advertiser editor Chris Daponte said the issues with Erin are significant – especially for the public, who deserve to know all that can publicly be known.
He lists the town’s handling of a “strategic realignment,” the departure of more than 20 town employees (some quit, others were fired), the town contracting out its water services and its refusal to release employee severance information, as recent examples of the secrecy that surrounds Erin’s local government.
“In some cases, it seems, the town prefers to keep even the most basic information a secret,” said Daponte.
“The Advertiser newsroom has about 100 years of combined experience dealing with municipalities across Ontario and none of us has ever experienced these problems, to this degree, elsewhere.”
Mayor Allan Alls was surprised to learn of the town’s designation.
“We record our meetings; we’re open to the public. I don’t understand where this is coming from,” he said in a phone interview.
To be fair, Alls was in Florida and unaware of the dubious distinction for Erin.
When it was explained the designation had a lot to do with Freedom of Information requests and the town’s two-year refusal to release information that other Wellington municipalities had more freely supplied, he conceded: “I don’t agree, but I get where it’s coming from.”
James Turk, director of the CFE at Ryerson University, said the goal of the award is not to shame anyone, but to demonstrate that legislation around Freedom of Information is weak.
“If the legislation is going to change, the public has to be aware,” Turk said.
“In the case of Erin, it was the pattern of resistance that caught our eye, and also the process of all communication going through a communication department. And then the [privacy commissioner case] … to block the release of information.
“It’s a control mechanism. It’s putting obstacles in the way of journalists. And journalists are the eyes and ears of the community.”
Daponte stressed the Advertiser does not have an axe to grind with the town or any staff members.
“It is our hope that this national ‘recognition’ from four independent press-freedom advocacy groups will force town officials to see the error of their ways and be forthright, once and for all, with Erin residents and the media,” he said.
For the most part I have agreed with the Advertiser. But today, I’ve lost respect. It seems like the paper has something to prove for themselves and is a little out of touch when it comes to the town.
1. Secrecy – there’s no secrecy when you read the legislation. It doesn’t allow for severances for be published. Why would the Town want to be sued for releasing how much people who have quit or been fired for in severance? Shouldn’t we be more worried about what they did over the last decade they were working there with our tax dollars?
2. Denying public access. Wrong. There’s no public access to wages unless you’re on the sunshine lost. There’s no public access to legal work etc. So why give an award to a town who’s doing their job in following legislation? If you have a beef with the rules go to the province.
3. The paper just wants to be recognized in a dying industry and do you think this will encourage readership amongst the same 20 people, I think no.
4. New employees on the job. So what. If they are that bad in their job they will be let go. That’s the CAO to worry about that. Seems like some staff don’t know what they are doing. Yes. Let the leadership of the CAO and mayor determine that.
5. Newspapers are not the eyes and ears of the community. They are the tongues. Wagging off and covering events. People are the eyes and ears.
Although there’s some truth to the allegations and the incompetence of some staff, that’s how legislation is interpreted. Maybe if you built a relationship with the town like you have with the other towns you would have better coverage.
Time to work with people not against them. What’s your issue?
Your article is quite valid. Amounts paid in severences can be published without nakming names. This is Councillor’s John Brennan’s remarks on Facebook regarding the story.
Mayor Allan Alls is out of town, so, as acting Mayor I want to share with you the response I have made to media inquiries about this story. As a responsible employer the town remains committed to protecting the privacy of current and former employees within the context of the results of this process and other privacy regulations.
Decisions around response to FOI requests were delegated to a former clerk quite a number of years before this issue arose, as the clerk’s office deals with regulatory matters. When the request was received the former clerk decided that the town had a legal obligation to protect the privacy of any individuals who left the service of the town during the requested period of time and that getting a ruling from the privacy commission was the best way to meet our obligations while protecting the town from legal liabilities over privacy matters. Thus the FOI request was denied. For this reason, the matter did not, nor has it ever been presented to Council for a decision as to whether to grant the request or not.
From a personal viewpoint, I thought this would go to the commission and there would be a ruling in a relatively short period of time. If the commission said that the town was correct not to release the information that would vindicate the former clerk’s decision. If, on the other hand, the commission said that the town was incorrect and that the information should be released as requested, then the town could do so without facing any legal liabilities as it would have been only complying with the commission ruling. I don’t think anyone envisioned that the process would take 2 years. However, a review by an independent Commission takes time and the length of time had an impact on legal fees. Although I can understand that $18,000 seems to be a lot of money for legal fees, it actually would in all likelihood be dwarfed by the costs of dealing with one or more lawsuits from disgruntled former employees.
Ultimately, in discussion with the Commission the Town was given the confidence that employee privacy would not be breached, and therefore the Town released all the information requested. In fact, the Town actually provided additional information that was not part of the original request.
The town has seen a large turnover in staff since 2012, the beginning of the period for which severance information was requested, and the process uncovered some confusion over records leading to misstatements over missing or destroyed records. Current staff have and continue to work to ensure that such confusion does not happen again.
I don’t believe that I have ever been uncooperative with media requests and to the best of my knowledge councillors and staff regularly interact with the media. All our council meetings are open to the public and the only times council meets behind closed doors are for those exceptions listed in the Municipal Act and the exception in each case is cited in the public session. In fact, all our council meetings are available online for real time or future viewing by anyone unable to attend in person.
The Town of Erin respects the privacy laws of Canada and will take necessary action that protects the privacy of residents and employees, while continuing to operate in an open and transparent manner and striving to provide our residents with accurate and complete information. Erin is one of only a few municipalities in Ontario to have passed a Citizen Engagement Charter which was led by our Communication Officer in 2018.
Pure Political Rhetoric