I wish to begin by saying that staff are to be commended for the report on the Code of Conduct presented to Council on August 3. The staff proposal was thoughtful and well-reasoned, with robust rules for the conduct and the handling of complaints.
It also provided for a cost-effective and independent third party whose role would be to assess complaints forwarded by staff. All complaints would be vetted by staff to determine appropriateness under the code.
On August 3, the staff recommendation was significantly altered by a majority of Councillors.
I have some serious reservations about the proposed changes to the staff recommendation. The most significant change was the exclusion of the general public from the process.
No member of City Council should play a role in determining which complaints are deemed to be legitimate. During the August 3 consideration, a member of Council suggested that if the general public were permitted to access the Code of Conduct complaint route, the process could become weaponised. I feel that by having complaints routed through Councillors and perhaps initiated by Councillors, that indeed, the process would become weaponized and politicised.
My second reservation concerns the public’s mistrust of Council and the impact of the proposed changes on the public’s perception of the integrity of this Council. I understand that the public’s mistrust of Council largely comes from the previous Council. The MNP Governance Review reports:
- “Overwhelmingly, 82% of online survey respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed that Council ensures that the City is focused on the right things.”
and - “Sixty-eight percent of respondents strongly disagreed or disagreed that Council overall makes decisions based on what they believe is in the best interest of the city.”
In the past 11 months, we have heard many comments about the general public – comments referring to their role in civic discourse.
Some have been referred to as “the usual suspects”, some as “cheapskates”, some as NIMBYs, and it has been openly stated that comments from the public don’t add value. I disagree with this approach to the public. I firmly believe that we have a duty to listen to the public.
In conclusion, let me again express my appreciation to City Staff for the August 3 submission to Council. The proposal now before us is NOT supportable and I urge my fellow Councillors to reject it.
Appendix “A”: Links
August 3, 2023 Committee of the Whole
Staff Report
Video and discussion (starts at 1:29:10 – 3 hr discussion)
October 19, 2023 Council
Council Motion (staff recommendation for public access to the Code removed)
Video and Discussion: (starts at 27:44 – 25 min discussion)