Lack of transparency highlighted at MV Council meeting

At its Council-in-Committee meeting on Oct.3rd, MV Council listened to a presentation from Rae Stanley criticizing Council for operating “in a bubble.” She claimed that more open and effective communication was needed, while making it clear that her concerns were mostly influenced by the lack of reaction to earlier presentations she made on the subjects of flying the Pride flag in MV and the planning application to build a mosque in Hassanville. She also criticized the abandonment of a public question period at Council meetings — something which The Current has previously criticized, among other things, in its editorial Assisted by a complicit CAO, MV Council flouts its obligations of transparency, accountability and integrity. Click HERE to read. Stanley also raised some complaints that were not relevant to the powers of municipal councils as they are requirements imposed by, for example, the Planning Act.

After thanking Stanley for her presentation, Mayor Willmer invited questions or comments from Council — and when none were forthcoming, she questioned this by exclaiming, “No questions? No interaction!” Shown at top from left: Councillors Maika and Blank, Mayor Willmer, CAO Klatt, Councillor Olsheski (David Shulist absent) October 3, 2023. Photo: YouTube/MadawaskaValley.

Municipal insurance costs

The issue of “transparency” reared its head in other items on the Agenda at that meeting. In her Finance Report, MV Treasurer Amanda Hudder revealed that it was going to cost ratepayers an additional 23.3 percent to renew the municipal insurance policy — this following a 25 percent increase last year. She advised that there would be an “in-depth review” by Council when it considered the two competing bids. On seeing this when the Agenda was published, The Current wrote to the Treasurer, CAO Klatt and all members of Council suggesting that the “in-depth” review that Hudder referenced in her report consider the impact of the several hundreds of thousands of dollars of legal fees spent in futile attempts to persuade two Courts to dismiss The Current’s owners’ claims alleging abuse of power aimed at undermining The Current’s reputation. Ironically, The Current argues that the abuse of power was largely motivated by its exposure of previous examples of lack of transparency and accountability.

MV Treasurer Amanda Hudder.

We cannot tell you what was discussed about these insurance cost issues and with what result because it all happened behind closed doors, despite the fact that the current Treasurer’s Report referring to it is a public document. In an attempt to get some transparency, The Current wrote again to the Treasurer and CAO asking why “no comment was made about Council’s ‘in-depth review’ mentioned in the (public) Treasurer’s Report, or whether the work being done in conjunction with [broker] McDougall’s has resulted in a lower premium. Also, whether the insurer continues to be Intact.” At the date of this report, no response has been received to this as well.

Review of Freedom of Information law demanded

Also on the same Agenda was the request from another municipality that MV Council adopt suggestions for reform of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA). This Act, when it was introduced in 1991, was trumpeted as ensuring “unwavering dedication to privacy protection while pursuing a more open, transparent and accountable Ontario.” Over the passage of time there has been mounting criticism from both sides about the delays and costs occasioned by the procedures set out in the Act. On the local front, following an appeal, MV itself was criticized by an Information and Privacy Commission Adjudicator in 2019 “because of its flawed interpretation of its obligations under the Act” which saddled ratepayers with the not insignificant legal and other costs of them having to ensure proper compliance. There was no discussion about CAO Klatt’s recommendation to support the request that the Ministry review MFIPPA, the Mayor introducing it by saying, “I agree with that recommendation.” The motion was proposed by Councillor Maika, seconded by Councillor Olsheski, and carried. Given that a recent judicial inquiry and surveys have shown that there is now an even greater need for municipal accountability, it is to be hoped that any reforms to MFIPPA will not result in the baby being thrown out with the bathwater.

Concurrently with the publication of this article, The Current also publishes a report on planning matters given at the same meeting by MV Manager of Planning and Development, Luke Desjardins.

One comment

  1. Mike Krawchuk

    Lack of Transparency…..and Accountability abound in most of the 444 Municipalities in Ontario….BIG & SMALL.
    One does not have to look very far to see the lack of transparency and accountability in and by Municipal Councils and Township Staff in Renfrew County. Look at the number of cases reviewed by the Ontario Ombusman’s Office
    The ever increasing cost of Municipal Operations and Governance has driven the need for Municipal Councils and Staff to be less transparent and accountable to ratepayers.
    For the past few years the number of ” CLOSED” sessions of Council has rizen to ridiculous numbers. WHY?
    Rural Municipalities will be facing formidable and unique challenges when it comes to providing required infrastructure to shape their futures.(FOCM Report)
    FOCM says that all levels of government need to sit down and start sorting out what makes sense. The next 20 years will be filled with many challenges. Will common sense prevail? A one size fit all policy will not work.
    One of the biggest problems that small rural municipalities have is a declining work force and an increasing retiree population. An emphases must be placed on dealing with this matter.
    A new path/direction needs to be found for small rural municipalities with a population of 5000 and less.
    Being less transparent and accountable will and already has caused some major problems, headaches and issues for Municipal Councils and Township Staff.
    North Algona Wilberforce Township still limits(from covid times)the number of ratepayers that can attend Council & Committee Meetings. 4 or 5 chairs are availble to the 3000 residents of the Township.
    The agenda public question period was eliminated by NAW Council several years ago.
    Council & Staff for North Algona Wilberforce Township do not want to directly deal with ratepayers. If you have a question or concern….go as a delegation before Council or submit the matter through the Townships Tracker system where you will never speak directly with Council or Staff. The other option….catch up with a Council member at the dump….everyone goes there.
    Sorry for the rant.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to Top
Comment Rules

  • Please show respect to the opinions of others no matter how seemingly far-fetched.
  • Abusive, foul language, and/or divisive comments may be deleted without notice.
  • In order to avoid confusion in the community, commenters must provide their full name (first and last) and a valid email address.
  • Comments must be limited to the number of words displayed above the comment box.

Verified by MonsterInsights