02 July 27, 2002 - ObserverXtra

More documents

Recommendations

Info

12 12 12 WOOLWICH OBSERVER • OBSERVERFEATURE • JULY 27, 2002 By Joanne Peach OBSERVER STAFF How much is too much when politicians take their meetings behind closed doors? The openness of local government and its commitment to the democratic process continues to be a bone of contention for public watchdogs seeking more government accountability. Organizations looking for greater transparency in local government say Ontario’s new municipal act will give more power to municipal councils. The act comes in to affect in January 2003. “Municipalities are given the flexibility and latitude in certain areas to conduct affairs as they see fit, without the province serving as a babysitter,” reported the Ontario Community Newspaper Association (OCNA) in response to the proposed legislation, Bill 111. That raises serious concerns about the future of democracy in local government, said Don Lamont, executive director of the OCNA. Lamont fears the new act will allow municipal governments to follow an existing trend toward conducting public business behind closed doors. “The basic premise behind democracy is that it’s Sec 55, subsection (5) “A meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered is: A B personal transparent and it occurs in the open so that every citizen can participate and that every citizen understands the issues – that leads to an informed citizenry and that’s a critical ingredient of democracy,” said Lamont. As the conduit for local news and information, local media, in particular, are finding it increasingly difficult to obtain public information from municipal governments. The issue of government accountability came to the forefront in this area recently when Wellesley council opted to bypass a by-election option, on the premise of saving money, in favour of conducting a council election to replace former the security of the property of the municipality or local board. matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees.
councillor Paul Schweitzer. While the decision was legal under the municipal act, the process of how council reached that decision is questionable. By their own admission, Wellesley council discussed the issue and made its decision in a closed meeting without publicly announcing its intentions until it placed an advertisement in a low-circulation newspaper just two business days prior to the election. As such, the public could only sit back and observe a process that had already been predetermined. Wellesley council is not an isolated case though; journalists across Ontario have experienced similar difficulty obtaining information reserved exclusively for closed meetings. Earlier this year, reporter Bill Dunphy of the Hamilton Spectator learned that his local council met with developers in secret to discuss negotiations with developers trying to avoid city-planning regulations. “This is not city-owned land, this is a very ordinary zoning battle and our council is devising its negotiating position in secret,” said Dunphy. Alfred Romann of the Sentinel Review in Woodstock faced a similar problem after learning that the police services board on his beat opted to hold back its budget figures and hold a public committee meeting behind closed doors. In its report to the province, the OCNA specifically highlighted the tendency of municipal governments to enter incamera meetings (closed to the public) to avoid public scrutiny. “Community newspapers already see too much abuse of in-camera meetings with no consequences.” Some councils use the in-camera clause more than others do. Wellesley council, for example, opted to enter into a closed discussion during approximately 70 per cent of its meetings from July, 2001 through June, 2002. That’s disproportionately high compared to other C D a proposed or pending acquisition of land for municipal or local board purposes labour relations or employee negotiations. councils. So far this year, approximately 52 per cent of Mapleton Township’s meetings have been closed, 55 per cent in Guelph-Eramosa Township, 54 per cent in North Dumfries Township and 30 per cent in Woolwich Township. “Certainly from my knowledge of how most councils operate that seems to be outside the normal pattern for council,” said Robert Williams, political science professor at the University of Waterloo, in reference to the number of closed meetings held at Wellesley council. “These (in-camera meetings) are only for extraordinary purposes and only in these seven areas that are spelled out in the bill,” said Williams. “It’s (the municipal act) basically saying everything happens in public unless there is some very specific reason not to. You meet in public unless a case can be made otherwise,” he added. Woolwich Township’s chief administration officer (CAO), Peter Simmons, echoed those sentiments. “They (councils) are very much restricted as to what can be discussed in-camera. If related issues (pertaining to the seven clauses in the act) don’t surface, there’s not a huge need for those meetings,” said Simmons. Yet Wellesley council is confident its closed meetings are justified. According to Mayor Doug Bergman most of the reasons for closed sessions have centred on personnel and legal issues. “We’re doing a lot of land deals right now and we’re doing a lot of employee relations and things like that and that’s the reason for all the in-camera discussions,” said Bergman. “We’ve had no end of reasons for having caucus meetings … it has been excessive in the last little while, probably since this council has been E F in power,” added Wellesley CAO Susan Duke. According to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, under the current municipal act, councils are essentially their own watchdogs when it comes to deciding when a closed meeting is appropriate. “They (council) will have to have satisfied themselves that they have met the provisions of section 55, ” said Peter John Sidebottom, policy adviser to the ministry. The municipal act sites seven exceptions in section 55 when incamera meetings are deemed appropriate: Matters regarding security and property issues, personal matters about an identifiable individual, acquisition of land, labour relations, legal matters, receiving legal advice and a matter which council has authorized under another act. The act states that the “general nature” of closed meetings should be made public, said Williams. “Before a closed session they should be stating that fact and indicating the general nature of the matter to be discussed.” These declarations are often open to interpretation. Generic terms such as “personnel” and “legal,” often cited by council as the reason for an in-camera discussion, can mean a variety of different things. According to Mapleton CAO Patty Sinnamon, discussion surrounding an election process should be public. “I would think that would be an open process because you’re not talking about an individual specifically,” said Sinnamon in reference to clause b of the act (personal matters about an identifiable individual...) But the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing says council may use other clauses in the act to justify a closed session. “If they (council) have their solicitor advising them on what the legal options are then maybe the litigation or potential litigation. Including matters before administrative tribunals. affecting the municipality or local board. the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose. JULY 27, 2002 • OBSERVERFEATURE • WOOLWICH OBSERVER 13 13 receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege” clause (section 55,5,f), applies,” said Sidebottom. The degree to which municipal government is required to divulge the content of closed meetings has been a concern of citizens and public watchdogs for some time. “The provincial government should clearly mandate municipal councils to specify as much as possible about the topic to be discussed in-camera,” said the OCNA. “For example, when discussing the acquisition of land, go to the next level and say we are discussing the acquisition of land – for a new municipal building. “Additional clarification and information will enable the public to satisfy itself about the appropriateness of council’s decision to hold meetings behind closed doors,” the OCNA report suggested. But the provincial government has been reluctant to take action. The new municipal act remains, in reference to in-camera meetings, essentially the same as the current act. Sarnia- Lambton MPP Caroline Di Cocco’s private member’s bill (Bill 95: Ethics and transparency in public Matters Act) aimed at providing more accountability in municipal and provincial governments was recently defeated, just one step away from its third and final reading. As representatives of the community, local government is accountable to its constituents. Transparency in government plays a crucial role by allowing the public to make informed decisions when it comes time for them to exercise their franchise, said Lamont. “If they (public) know what’s transpiring then they can elect themselves good government.” “Wasn’t it Churchill who said, ‘we get the government we deserve,’” concluded Lamont. G a matter in respect of which a council, board, committee or other body has authorized a meeting to be closed under another act.
Page 1 and 2: JULY 27, 2002 • NEWS • WOOLWICH
Page 3 and 4: INSHORT Consultant to temper negoti
Page 5 and 6: What makes a storm a tornado? The s
Page 7 and 8: By By Steve Steve Kannon Kannon Kan
Page 9 and 10: Taking it “easy” in the middle-
Page 11: JULY 27, 2002 • OBSERVERFEATURE
Page 15 and 16: By By Hugo Hugo Rodrigues Rodrigues
Page 17 and 18: JULY 27, 2002 • SPORTS&LEISURE
Page 19 and 20: CLASSIFIEDADS The best place to buy
Page 21 and 22: LAW&ORDER By By Hugo Hugo Rodrigues
Page 23 and 24: AGRICULTURE’S ROLE NEEDS STRENGTH
Page 25 and 26: CREEPINESS AT THE LIBRARY HOW DOES
Page 27 and 28: ONTARIOLIVESTOCKREPORT TUESDAY, JUL

02 July 27, 2002 - ObserverXtra

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?