Council here has re-appointed John Maddox of JGM consulting as the municipality’s closed meeting investigator.
The appointment was made over the objections of some council members who felt the township should consider obtaining the service through the Ontario Ombudsman’s Office.
On Dec. 13 council approved the reappointment for a two-year term commencing Jan. 1.
In a staff report, CAO Brad McRoberts provided council with three options for dealing with potential investigations.
Option one was not to appoint a closed meeting investigator and allow the ombudsman to assume the role by default.
“There is no cost to the municipality for these services. Township staff have had no experience in closed meeting investigations with the Office of the Ombudsman,” the report notes.
Option 2 was to appoint LAS (Local Authority Services), which has entered into service agreements with some municipalities across the province.
“The current cost includes an annual retainer of approximately $700, which the township would have to pay, plus the cost of an investigation at $225 per hour,”
The third option was to support the County of Wellington appointment of Maddox, a former municipal CAO and regional director with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing.
Maddox is currently the investigator for the Township of Mapleton and Wellington County, as well as all Wellington municipalities except Guelph-Eramosa, which contracts LAS.
“The closed meeting investigator position functions as an independent contractor,” the report explains.
“An annual retainer of $300 for each member municipality will be paid by the county in January of each year (the county also pays a $1,000 retainer). The hourly fee of $100 with reasonable, receipted expenses being reimbursed, and the respective municipal mileage rate will apply when an investigation commences. This fee will be paid by the municipality in which the investigation is being conducted.”
Mapleton staff recommend approval of Option 3, contracting the services of Maddox, “given his extensive municipal experience, which would provide a consistent method of investigation throughout the county and further that the retainer would be paid by the County of Wellington.”
Noting the current council had not made use of the investigator’s services during its term, councillor Michael Martin suggested council opt for the services of the Ombudsman.
“We talk about transparency a lot and I really believe that this council has made a concerted effort to try and be transparent,” he said. “We have the Office of the Ombudsman out there already that is already paid for by the taxpayer.”
While noting “the flip side” is that “people who have had experience with that office don’t always come away with glowing recommendations,” Martin pointed out, “It’s cheap. It doesn’t cost anything to go with the Office of the Ombudsman.”
Martin also noted the Ombudsman might be perceived as less biased.
“The perception is, at times or can be … to go out and hire a municipal staffer or ex-municipal staffer to investigate municipal staff can sometimes be perceived as problematic,” he said.
‘Already available’
“That sounds like a reasonable idea,” said councillor Dennis Craven. However, he suggested an investigator sent by the Ombudsman’s Office “may also be retired, or semi-retired or former municipal staff as well.”
“With all due respect do you know that for sure, Dennis?” asked councillor Lori Woodham.
“No. I said may,” replied Craven.
Woodham said, “If it’s something that is already available for all citizens to use, why would we pay for something? But I’d like to understand more of what the Office of the Ombudsman is.”
She suggested obtaining more information before making the decision.
“As far as history goes,” Mayor Neil Driscoll said, an independent investigator (former municipal CAO Norm Gamble) “was used by the previous council … and he contacted every councillor for that information.”
Driscoll said “someone from the complete outside” would require more time to get up to speed on issues.
“We didn’t have to explain the whole process to him.”
However, Driscoll was critical of Gamble’s handing of an investigation into a closed meeting of Mapleton council in April of 2013. Among the questions raised by Driscoll at the time were:
– why Gamble initially sent only a written report on his investigation rather than presenting it to council; and
– why other members of council, aside from the then-Mayor Bruce Whale, were not interviewed during the investigation.
Councillor Marlene Ottens said having a designated investigator on retainer could be considered an act of transparency.
“To me having someone ready to go is kind of the ultimate expression of transparency. It says we’re so confident in our way of conducting our closed meetings that if someone feels something needs to be investigated this person’s there, go ahead,” Ottens said.
Woodham replied, “This ombudsman, he’s ready to go. If a citizen wants to call the ombudsman then they are ready to go. I find both are equal so why would we put a burden on our taxpayers?”
A resolution to contract Maddox was approved, with Driscoll, Ottens and Craven in favour and Martin and Woodham opposed.
