LEADERSHIP, ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY-Ha, fooled you!!

Melancthon Council was the subject of two closed meeting investigations relating to meetings held in the summer of 2010.

The consultant who did the investigation was retained by Melancthon Council.

As a result of the investigation, the consultant Amberley Gavel found (and these are just the hi-lites)
“on the face of it the public portion of the meeting was a sham both at the outset and even more critically at the conclusion of the meeting:”

"The placing of the notice (of the meeting) in a different location on the website made it difficult, if not impossible for the public to observe the actions of the council.:

"The resolution indicates that the meeting was closed in order to “discuss a matter pertaining to the receiving of advice that is subject to Solicitor/Client Privilege…. However the presence (in the closed meeting) of the party opposite in the agreement suggests the real reason was to finalize negotiation of the agreement.”

“The report …..does not fit within the exception relied upon in the public motion authorizing the closed meeting…:

“If the planners report is going on a council agenda, it should be on the public portion.”

The recommendations made by Amberley Gavel?

Simply that the procedure bylaw be updated and Council and staff undertake further training on procedures. 

Seriously that is it.  No reprimand, nothing.

The consultant further advised that if implemented, the recommendations would assist council and staff in serving their community. (gasp!!)

So there. Easy peasy, right?

Well not so fast.

Did Council accept their own consultants recommendations and look inward as to how they could better serve their constituents and show a commitment to transparency, move the municipality in a new direction and show leadership in setting a new tone with their ratepayers?

Survey says.....NO.

While this council is loathe to spend any money on lawyers, OMB hearings, bylaws, or hiring peer reviewers in a timely fashion against anyone proposing a 2,300 hundred acre 200 foot below the water table open pit limestone mine situate on prime agricultural land, they certainly don’t mind spending taxpayers money on a legal opinion to tell the taxpayers why Council is NOT at fault for anything.

And why isn’t it Council’s fault?

According to the lawyer (and this isn't the exhaustive list of excuses) it was because:

1. This was the meeting investigators first investigation- Following that logic, if a lawyer wins his/her first case in court does that mean the lawyers case should be found to be flawed?

2. There were more people at the complainants interview than at staff’s interview. Wouldn’t the answers all be the same whether there was 1 or 10 people in the interview?

3. Despite being legislated as to how closed and open meetings are to be held, the lawyer states that Council didn’t list the meeting as open because “ratepayers in the past have indicated that they do not wish to attend a meeting when most of the time would be spent in private session”. Wow, there are rules and standards for electricians, but my uncle told me one time just to stick a penny in the fusebox, it would work just as well and not waste time.  Do you think an electrician would get off in a court of law if something went south real quick employing this method?

4. And then there is this great logic-ratepayers need to be sophisticated (which means smarter I think, not sure I am not sophisticated enough to figure it out).  In fact the lawyer advises "any ratepayer sophisticated enough to follow Council matters would know that no decisions can be made in closed meetings and that a by-law could only be passed in an open meeting:  So there people, go get your political science degree so you can understand the machinations of Council. The rest of us unsophisticated hicks will have to stay at home and play our six string banjos with our six fingers and shoot possums from the front porch I guess.

Highlands, please continue with whatever you were doing (demolishing houses, cutting trees, ridding us of the pesky bobolink, altering sites without adhering to the site alteration bylaw, etc. etc.) because Council has no intention of ever standing up to you.

All other ratepayers, beware and be warned.

Council WILL stand up for their right to be wrong and make us wrongly pay.

If you want to read the entire report and solicitor’s letter open this link and read page 54 to 65.
http://melancthontownship.ca/11council/agenda.sept8.pdf