May
02, 2012 - 2:22 PM
Newmarket's
conduct code 'toothless': Kerwin
An
issue between councillors shouldn’t be resolved with taxpayer dollars, according
to Dave Kerwin.
The Ward 2 councillor plans to bring forward a motion at the next Newmarket council meeting to throw out a code of conduct bylaw that governs councillor-to-councillor complaints, rather than watch the 123 items council has to deal with in the next three months pushed aside because of complaints.
“If you have a problem with another member of council, figure it out yourself and don’t waste the taxpayers’ dollars,” he said. “Our code is toothless and a waste of time.”
The code of conduct was approved by council in 2007, but the first recorded complaint was early last year, according to an internal memo from CAO Bob Shelton to council members.
The memo goes onto say, to date, Mr. Shelton has been involved in one staff complaint against a council member and two complaints between council members, which have been resolved. One required a meeting during which Mr. Shelton and Mayor Tony Van Bynen were present, along with the two council members.
Residents have also filed complaints against council members, which have since been withdrawn. At one point, one of the resident complaints involved eight council members.
Upon legal advice, Mr. Shelton was unable to identify those accused or those filing the complaints.
“Although the number of complaints is relatively small, these matters require careful consideration and legal advice and other information gathering can be quite sensitive,” Mr. Shelton said.
As CAO, he admits it is difficult being asked to resolve conflicts between members of a council, to whom he directly reports. It also takes the CAO and another staff member away from completing their regular duties.
About 25 hours have been spent attending to these complaints and the municipality has paid external costs for legal advice, he confirmed.
While council continues to debate whether or not to approve the CAO’s request to bring in a third party, at a cost of $50,000, to deal with code of conduct complaints, it agreed any complaints between its members will be dealt with by council behind closed doors rather than by the CAO
The Ward 2 councillor plans to bring forward a motion at the next Newmarket council meeting to throw out a code of conduct bylaw that governs councillor-to-councillor complaints, rather than watch the 123 items council has to deal with in the next three months pushed aside because of complaints.
“If you have a problem with another member of council, figure it out yourself and don’t waste the taxpayers’ dollars,” he said. “Our code is toothless and a waste of time.”
The code of conduct was approved by council in 2007, but the first recorded complaint was early last year, according to an internal memo from CAO Bob Shelton to council members.
The memo goes onto say, to date, Mr. Shelton has been involved in one staff complaint against a council member and two complaints between council members, which have been resolved. One required a meeting during which Mr. Shelton and Mayor Tony Van Bynen were present, along with the two council members.
Residents have also filed complaints against council members, which have since been withdrawn. At one point, one of the resident complaints involved eight council members.
Upon legal advice, Mr. Shelton was unable to identify those accused or those filing the complaints.
“Although the number of complaints is relatively small, these matters require careful consideration and legal advice and other information gathering can be quite sensitive,” Mr. Shelton said.
As CAO, he admits it is difficult being asked to resolve conflicts between members of a council, to whom he directly reports. It also takes the CAO and another staff member away from completing their regular duties.
About 25 hours have been spent attending to these complaints and the municipality has paid external costs for legal advice, he confirmed.
While council continues to debate whether or not to approve the CAO’s request to bring in a third party, at a cost of $50,000, to deal with code of conduct complaints, it agreed any complaints between its members will be dealt with by council behind closed doors rather than by the CAO
**************************
So...let's see what we have here.
Newmarket adopted a Code of Conduct in 2007. No Integrity Commissioner Considerable savings of public resources. .
.
Aurora had two Integrity Commissioners. The second with a contract beyond the term of council.that cost $40,000. The first on retainer six months before the contract was signed .
Then "stripped of authority" in the time it took to file a complaint and have it dismissed as less than kosher.
But the retainer fee would continue according to the contract. Small things like that didn't disturb Aurora Council .2006/10
The second Commissioner dealt with two complaints filed at the same time by one of the same Councillors who signed the first complaint against the same Councillor first complained about . The two complaints were not dealt with in accordance with any process known to man but produced precisely the result paid for. Therefore he was not "stripped of his authority"
First Integrity Commissioner ''stripped of his authority" but not fast enough to invalidate hs first decision.. Which was , to find the complaint filed against the same Councillor by six Councillors, one of whom filed the second two complaints, ..... "to be wholly political"
in nature.
In Newmarket, minimal activity under the Code of Conduct.. Names of complainants and
"accused" mot revealed " upon legal advice." Therefore collateral damage against all parties avoided
In Aurora , $70,000 spent on legal services to "investigate" a law abiding citizen and Councillor, by a lawyer and for him to report what he perceived to be the meaning of comments and statements made by said Councillor and write the complaint against said Councillor, to be published in every venue available.,. also at public expense.
Members of Newmarket Council should be directed to read this blog and steer considerable more than the short distance between our two towns, away from an infernal code of conduct and costs thereof, including clear and direct potential for humiliating results in the next municipal election....no matter how far distant.
Since when does any red-blooded politician worth his or her salt need to avail themselves of panty-waist Codes of Conduct , Integrity Commissioners , lawyers and publishers.
Duke it out in the political arena as Nature and the Gods intended.
The populace will deplore it and exalt it at the same time.
Awareness in the Town's affairs will be maintained at the highest level possible.
Can that be bad? .
So...let's see what we have here.
Newmarket adopted a Code of Conduct in 2007. No Integrity Commissioner Considerable savings of public resources. .
.
Aurora had two Integrity Commissioners. The second with a contract beyond the term of council.that cost $40,000. The first on retainer six months before the contract was signed .
Then "stripped of authority" in the time it took to file a complaint and have it dismissed as less than kosher.
But the retainer fee would continue according to the contract. Small things like that didn't disturb Aurora Council .2006/10
The second Commissioner dealt with two complaints filed at the same time by one of the same Councillors who signed the first complaint against the same Councillor first complained about . The two complaints were not dealt with in accordance with any process known to man but produced precisely the result paid for. Therefore he was not "stripped of his authority"
First Integrity Commissioner ''stripped of his authority" but not fast enough to invalidate hs first decision.. Which was , to find the complaint filed against the same Councillor by six Councillors, one of whom filed the second two complaints, ..... "to be wholly political"
in nature.
In Newmarket, minimal activity under the Code of Conduct.. Names of complainants and
"accused" mot revealed " upon legal advice." Therefore collateral damage against all parties avoided
In Aurora , $70,000 spent on legal services to "investigate" a law abiding citizen and Councillor, by a lawyer and for him to report what he perceived to be the meaning of comments and statements made by said Councillor and write the complaint against said Councillor, to be published in every venue available.,. also at public expense.
Members of Newmarket Council should be directed to read this blog and steer considerable more than the short distance between our two towns, away from an infernal code of conduct and costs thereof, including clear and direct potential for humiliating results in the next municipal election....no matter how far distant.
Since when does any red-blooded politician worth his or her salt need to avail themselves of panty-waist Codes of Conduct , Integrity Commissioners , lawyers and publishers.
Duke it out in the political arena as Nature and the Gods intended.
The populace will deplore it and exalt it at the same time.
Awareness in the Town's affairs will be maintained at the highest level possible.
Can that be bad? .
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment