"Cowardice asks the question...is it safe? Expediency asks the question...is it politic? Vanity asks the question...is it popular? But conscience asks the question...is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because it is right." ~Dr. Martin Luther King

Friday 5 December 2008

Birth of the Code of Conduct (and other stuff)

I am never surprised but always intrigued to read the Mayor's responses in the media on any town issue. Last week's quotes on Code of Conduct were no exception. There was reference to lawyer George Rust-D'Eye having been retained to “investigate” after “privileged information was made public.”

The night he was retained, Mayor Morris refused to disclose precisely why. “Ah no, Councillor Buck. You will not drag me into that” she said in answer to my respectful inquiry.

The “leak” referred to above appeared three months after a decision was made behind closed doors. Mr. Rust-D' Eye never did ask if I was the source. Neither, I believe, was The Auroran queried.

Residents may recall the news story that council refused to sell land we had for sale to York Regional Police as a site for new York Regional Police Headquarters. Even now I shudder to contemplate what we lost.

The decision was made in September, following a meeting with the Chief of Police and the Regional Chairman. In November, there had still been no disclosure. Why would a leak take three months to filter out? Why, in that time frame, had the matter not been “reported out” as required by legislation governing public decisions made behind closed doors?

Fast forward twelve months; there is still no public record of the fact Council refused to sell land at the appraised value to the Region for a Central Police headquarters.

The Region and the Regional Police Department knew the facts. Why should it surprise anyone a story like that might be the talk of the town and eventually drift back to The Auroran.

From thence came an allegation of “a leak of privileged information.” The Mayor retained legal counsel to “investigate”. By -the-by we have no reason to believe the action was in accordance with Administrative Policy No. 50, the Town's Procurement Policy which governs how public funds shall be expended.

The night the decision was made not to sell the land the vote was four to three to direct the CAO to continue discussions leading to a sale. One councillor was absent. The Mayor voted against and created a tie thereby defeating the resolution.

Invariably, when an issue emerges which may reflect unfavourably on the Mayor and her loyal band, shouts of Mayor-Bashing are heard throughout the land. Lawyers are retained and the hunt is on to catch the dastardly villain who has failed to act with proper decorum and discretion. The focus of attention is redirected.

As a consequence, we now have a Code of Conduct. Staff spent time to research and write it. According to the Mayor, we spent an additional $4000 for a legal review of staff's work by Mr. Rust-D'Eye. I did not know that. We have retained an Integrity Commissioner to deal with complaints against councillors. We do not know specifics of the terms of his contract. But the Mayor already has a work schedule prepared outside of the complaint process.


In summation, A leak of privileged information was presumed. We retained legal counsel to “investigate”. Results of “the investigation” were never released. We paid a legal bill of $16,200. We did release Mr. Rust D'Eye's recommendations There were two; we could appoint an executive committee composed of all councillors except one or we could adopt a Code of Conduct with penalties for non-compliance.

Council directed staff to prepare a Code of Conduct. According to the mayor we then paid George Rust-D’Eye $4000 to review the document. Presumably, with wisdom and decorum, it was read, understood, signed by eight out of nine councillors and passed into legislation as a Town Bylaw. Even though., as it eventually transpired, it contained unenforceable requirements. So much for the $4000 worth of legal review.

Now the Mayor informs us in the media more tax dollars will be expended for the Integrity Commissioner to review the document again and “make amendments if necessary”

If the Mayor's quotes are accurate, directions have already been given to the new Integrity Commissioner without the authority of council If the Commissioner is not sufficiently aware of how a municipality functions to understand that a Mayor has no authority to act except through a resolution of council, can we realistically expect improvement over our current situation?

The saga continues to unfold.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

this is totally out of hand!

can't we prorogue council?????