As the result of harassment allegations, council here has adopted an official code of conduct for municipal councillors and is planning to appoint an integrity commissioner to enforce the code.
Council adopted the code of conduct at the June 25 meeting and it is anticipated a recommendation to appoint a commissioner will be dealt with at the regular meeting on July 9.
CAO Patty Sinnamon told the Advertiser that development of the code, which is effective July 1, was in reaction to two harassment complaints heard by council during the latter part of 2012.
Sinnamon said she could not divulge the source of the complaints, which were “dealt with confidentially” but she did confirm that one complaint was “internal” and the other was an external complaint from “an outside organization.”
She said the complaints were heard in a closed meeting of council.
However, councillor Mike Downey said the external complaint originated from the Wellington County planning department.
He said the allegations of harassment stemmed from the actions of “at least two councillors” at the Oct. 9 regular council meeting, during which a county planner took part in a discussion about the impact of changes to the township’s comprehensive zoning bylaw on minimum distance separation (MDS) regulations for rural building lots.
Downey said he was unaware of any allegations of harassment until the Dec. 11 meeting, when Wellington County CAO Scott Wilson and county human resources director Andrea Lawson attended an in-camera session of Mapleton council.
“They said they had done a full investigation and said we definitely were guilty, at least two councillors – wouldn’t name names – but there was at least two of us that were guilty.”
Downey said, “There was absolutely nobody from our council who was spoken to other than maybe (Mayor) Bruce Whale,” during the investigation.
“We’re being painted as guilty without a trial,” he said.
Downey said the allegations came out of a council meeting he considered “open public dialogue” and that neither he nor any other Mapleton councillor had “any outside contact with any county staff or anything like that, at all.”
Wilson declined to discuss harassment allegations when contacted by the Advertiser and said the county was not involved in Mapleton’s decision to adopt a code of conduct.
“I don’t know anything about a code of conduct in Mapleton,” he said. “If Mapleton passed a code of conduct they did so of their own volition.”
The code was developed with the assistance of human resources consultants Ward and Uptigrove. Sinnamon said the consultant’s fee for preparation of the code and “conflict resolution training” was $10,000 plus HST.
Council meeting agendas indicate consultant Ben Cornell, of Ward and Uptigrove, met with council at in-camera sessions on Dec. 11, 2012 and Feb. 21, 2013.
On Dec. 11, the agenda indicates the meeting with the consultant involved, “education or training the members of council, board or a committee,” and listed the topic as “Workplace Violence and Harassment Bill 168 Respectful Workplace.”
Other items on the in-camera agenda for Dec. 11 included presentations from Wilson and Lawson, and a separate presentation by Sinnamon. The session was held in-camera under “personal matters about an identifiable individual.”
On Feb. 21, Cornell attended a meeting held in-camera due to “personal matters” and “education and training.”
In a report to council on June 25, Sinnamon explained the Municipal Act permits the appointment of an integrity commissioner who reports to council and is responsible for performing, in an independent manner, functions assigned by the municipality with respect to application of the code.
Members of council can ask the integrity commissioner for advice, Sinnamon explained.
“Generally this is to ensure that members of council have available a resource to assist them in determining how to comply with the requirements of the code,” she said.
Council, any member of council, or members of the public can ask the commissioner to launch an inquiry and, if necessary, an investigation into an alleged contravention by an individual member or members of council. The executive summary to the code states councillors are expected to:Ӭ
– act in the common good (public interest);
– act in good faith at all times and demonstrate honesty and integrity;
– be professional, civil and respectful in all dealings with the public, staff and all other stakeholders;
– comply with all applicable statutes and policies;
– avoid conflicts of interest and undue influence;
Рrespect the decisions of council;Ӭ
– maintain confidentiality;
– be accountable and transparent with all stakeholders;
– be respectful of others’ time, interests and personal approach;
– work through the CAO rather than dealing directly with department heads or staff (the code states it is acceptable to ask questions of department heads directly, but not give direction);
– communicate with all stakeholders in a prompt and professional manner;
– not harass or bully staff or other stakeholders;
– not discriminate; and
– promote a healthy, safe and respectful workplace.
The summary notes, “It is expected that the violations of this code will be rare,” and that complainants are encouraged to resolve disputes informally, before filing a complaint.
At the June 25 meeting, Downey said the 25-page code of conduct, which includes eight pages of appendices, is overly complicated and, in some cases, restrictive.
Downey specifically objected to the section requiring councillors to work only through the CAO, rather than individual department heads.
“As a ratepayer, when I have a concern about building, I go to the building department,” he explained, adding, “This is basically saying as a councillor, as an elected official, I have less rights than a taxpayer.”
“I don’t think it says that at all,” responded Whale, who said it “was a requirement that we agreed to develop a code of conduct for council.”
Downey disagreed the code was a requirement, pointing out it isn’t mandatory under the Municipal Act.
“This is in front of us because of an allegation of harassment from an organization to council; and that organization does not have a code of conduct,” Downey stated.
“What would you have us do to make this satisfactory to you?” asked councillor Neil Driscoll, who indicated he didn’t want to have to take additional time off work to discuss the issue further.
“Simplify it,” replied Downey.
While noting he “respects councillor Downey’s opinions,” councillor Andy Knetsch said, “I disagree with you on this. I think we spent a lot of time going through this document and I think it shows transparency and I think it shows due diligence, so I support this document.”
At Downey’s request, a recorded vote was held on a recommendation to adopt the code and direct the CAO to proceed with recruiting a municipal integrity commissioner and report back with a recommendation at the July 9 meeting. The motion passed with Whale, Driscoll, Knetsch and councillor Jim Curry voting in favour and only Downey opposed.
Sinnamon told the Advertiser the commissioner would operate in similar fashion to the municipality’s closed meeting investigator and would be paid “a nominal retainer” plus an agreed-upon rate for any investigations conducted.
The code of conduct can be viewed at www.mapleton.ca/live-mapleton/council.
