City councillors did not violate any municipal rules when a February meeting of council committee met behind closed doors to talk about the recreation facility, says an investigator.
On Feb. 5, council committee moved into a closed session meeting in the Tudhope-McIntyre boardroom at city hall to deal with what city staff labeled a ‘legal matter’ related to the recreation centre under construction at 255 West St.
At that meeting, a trio of city councillors – Mason Ainsworth, Rob Kloostra and Sarah Valiquette-Thompson – voted to hold the meeting in public. They were defeated.
After the closed-to-the-public meeting, Ainsworth expressed his dismay about the decision to have the discussion outside of the public realm.
“I don’t think people would be happy if they knew what was going on in that closed session,” Ainsworth told OrilliaMatters after that February meeting.
“(It’s) about accountability of council and staff and of the municipality as a whole,” Ainsworth said. “If we’re talking about the rec centre, the timeline, money … those discussions can happen in the public realm and I don’t think they should be hidden away for political reasons, which is it’s an election year and some people don’t want to be embarrassed.”
However, Orillia Mayor Steve Clarke said having the discussion in public “would have been potentially irresponsible.” He suggested Ainsworth file a complaint if he disagreed.
Ainsworth did just that, filing an official complaint with the city’s closed-meeting investigator, who contracted out the probe to Amberley Gavel Ltd.
This week, Gavel’s report was presented to council. Gavel concluded, after an investigation that took almost four months and included a review of agendas and minutes from relevant meetings in addition to multiple conversations with the city Clerk/CAO “that council committee for the City of Orillia was properly in closed session when it went into closed session to consider litigation and potential litigation on Feb. 5, 2018.
“It may have been that every item discussed, if discussed on its own, would not have qualified, but we are satisfied that the discussion came together as a whole and was related to possible litigation and thus the information presented met the exceptions permitted in the Municipal Act,” said the report.
“We do advise councils and staff to always consider if a report can be bifurcated in order to present as much as possible in the public domain without impairing the interests of the corporation. We are satisfied that this was not a practical option for council committee on Feb. 5, 2018.”
Ainsworth told OrilliaMatters he “accepts” the report. That doesn’t mean he likes it.
“I accept the decision (but) it shows the process needs to be looked at by the province,” Ainsworth said. “As it stands, as long as we speak about something at the same time as something legal it is deemed acceptable according to this report,” he said.
“I do not think that ‘political embarrassment’ and discussions around how to prevent it should be hidden in closed session,” said Ainsworth, echoing his original concerns about the meeting’s content. “People deserve an accountable council.”
