Warden George Bridge says local municipalities operate in extremely transparent fashion and imposing mandatory codes of conduct and integrity commissioners would be “overkill.”
In the first annual report under his office’s new, expanded mandate, Ontario Ombudsman Paul Dubé is calling for the province to make conduct codes mandatory for municipalities, along with a requirement to appoint integrity commissioners.
The ombudsman’s mandate was expanded in the past year to include more than 1,000 public sector organizations, including provincial government bodies, municipalities, universities and school boards.
“I think it’s another layer of government; at our level, we’re so transparent and so in front of the people all of the time … in a small town,” said Bridge when contacted by the Advertiser.
“I can maybe see in a big city … where you can’t get hold of your representative, you can’t talk to them, you can’t go to their house, you can phone them up and they don’t get back to you …
“But I don’t know how much more transparent we can get.”
The ombudsman’s report, released on Nov. 3, states that in the new jurisdiction of municipalities, the conduct of municipal politicians was by far the most common concern brought to the ombudsman.
Of 918 cases between Jan. 1 and March 31, 266 (or 29%) related to councils and committees.
The ombudsman’s office has recommended that municipal legislation – now under review – make codes of conduct and integrity commissioners mandatory, and clarify the rules for closed meetings, which the Ombudsman also investigates in 218 municipalities.
The ombudsman’s office is the default investigator for complaints from the public about closed meetings of municipal councils.
However, municipalities may elect to appoint their own meeting investigator, as Wellington County and its member municipalities have done (they appointed John Maddox of JGM Consulting).
As of Jan. 1 the Ontario Ombudsman has been allowed to take public complaints about general business of municipalities.
In response to the changes, the Town of Minto, where Bridge is mayor, approved a streamlined process for dealing with citizen complaints and concerns.
While declining to appoint an integrity commissioner or other local official to adjudicate disputes, council agreed to simply accept oversight from the ombudsman’s office, once the local complaint process is exhausted.
In a report to town council on March 1, Minto CAO Bill White explained the Municipal Act currently allows an integrity commissioner, municipal ombudsman and auditor general to be appointed to provide oversight in key areas of municipal business.
However, it notes the ombudsman’s new oversight role applies even if a municipality has all these appointments in place, although the ombudsman cannot become involved until the local appointee has made a decision.
“We tried to work it exactly as the Ombudsman wanted it,” stated Bridge.
“We haven’t had a need in this particular council.
“If we need one, we can always get an integrity commissioner, but to have one on staff, or one we have to pay a retainer, what do we need the expense for? … I think it’s a bit of overkill myself.”
The Town of Erin is the only Wellington County municipality to retain an integrity commissioner. The municipality appointed Robert Williams as commissioner in 2013.
The Township of Mapleton adopted a code of conduct on June 25, 2013. Mapleton council also directed the CAO to proceed with recruiting a municipal integrity commissioner, however that process was put on hold in May of 2014 pending the current review of legislation governing municipalities.
Wellington North has a code of conduct that includes a provision to appoint an ethics commissioner in the event breaches of the code are alleged.
Puslinch has a code of conduct, but not a commissioner. Complaints are directed to the CAO.
Centre Wellington does not have a code of conduct or integrity commissioner, although a code has been identified as a need during strategic planning sessions.
Guelph-Eramosa does not have a code of conduct for councillors and has not appointed an integrity commissioner.
However, the township’s strategic planning committee has recommended developing policies to ensure compliance with the Accountability and Transparency Act.
The committee also recommended in December of 2015 that the Ontario Ombudsman be used as a default ombudsman for the township.
The County of Wellington does not retain a commissioner and does not have a councillor code of conduct in place. A code was discussed at the administration, finance and personnel committee level in 2013, but councillors at the time did not feel a formal code was needed, Wellington CAO Scott Wilson explained in an email.
Establishing relationships with new stakeholders in 444 municipalities, 21 universities and 82 school boards and school authorities drove the office’s work this year, the Ombudsman states in the report.
“This experience has underlined, for all of us, the importance of ensuring that who we are and what we do is clear to all Ontarians.”
In the education sector, school boards accounted for more cases (398) than provincial bodies like the Ontario Student Assistance Program (155), colleges of applied arts and technology (137) or universities (92), although school board cases were only within the Ombudsman’s mandate for seven months of fiscal 2015-16, and universities for three.
The most common topics of complaints about school boards were staff conduct, special education and transportation.
Although only one formal investigation relating to school boards has been launched to date, the report cites several examples where Ombudsman intervention prompted boards to improve their processes or policies.
Dubé’s report outlines the role, mission and processes of the Ombudsman, and categorizes significant cases and trends by topic, with the highest volume of complaints (34%) relating to “law and order” (policing and prisons), followed by social services (17%), education (12%), and municipalities (8%), among others.
“It is an exciting time to be at Ombudsman Ontario as we chart our course into new waters,” Dubé writes.
“We are building relationships to enhance the trust and credibility stakeholders have in the office, which will help us solve even more problems and enhance governance for the people we all serve.”
The complete report from the Ontario Ombudsman can be viewed at https://www.ombudsman.on.ca.
