Category Archives: Accountability

Bolger’s Presentation/Delegation To Council September 25

Posted on by

Warning – long post; put the kettle on or skip the details and read the summary below.

SUMMARY

Bolger was a presentation which, according to CAO Critchley ‘is a form of delegation and delegation rules apply equally’; no delegation request form was on the agenda, no speaking notes, and no letter. Bolger’s letter was on the August 10 Heritage Committee meeting agenda; the RTT reported on Bolger’s letter and the committee meeting; the heritage committee meeting Brittany’s Gate audio portion is unavailable; Critchley advised Bolger would be available for questions and would not be making a formal delegation – he was placed under the “Presentations’ and the letter was available in the Council In Camera Share Point folder; if I wanted a copy to please submit a Freedom of Information request; there was no notice of in-camera meeting.

DETAILS

Friday, September 22, 2:25 PM email notification from the town: Supplementary Agenda – September 25, 2023 contained only one item: PRESENTATIONS, 9.1 Presentation – Re: Item 13.2 Street Naming – Brittany Crescent and Stone Street – Norbert Bolger.

Sunday, September 24, 6:53 PM, I emailed questions about the procedural by-law to all members of council, including question 1: how was it determined that Mr. Bolger will be a ‘presentation’ at the September 25 council meeting instead of a ‘delegation’ when presentation is not defined in the by-law and he will be speaking to an agenda item like a delegate? 

Monday, September 25, 9:11 AM Councillor Pouget emailed all members of council and CAO Critchley: These are all very good questions and I for one, would appreciate answers to them, concerning our new procedural by-law.  When time permits, will you or one of your staff please respond to all copied in this email?

September 25 9:33 AM, Critchley emailed answers in red below my questions:

how was it determined that Mr. Bolger will be a ‘presentation’ at the September 25 council meeting instead of a ‘delegation’ when presentation is not defined in the by-law and he will be speaking to an agenda item like a delegate?

A “presentation” is a form of a delegation and so the rules for delegations apply equally. Mr. Bolger registered within the time frame set out in the Procedure By-law and notice of the delegation was made public with the revised Agenda which was posted on Friday.

September 25 council meeting AGENDA contained three items related to Bolger’s request:

  1. item 9 PRESENTATIONS, item 9.1 Presentation Re Item 13.2 Street Naming – Brittany Crescent and Stone Street – Norbert Bolger with a note that this item has no attachments;
  2. Item 13.2 under REPORTS – PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Street Naming – Brittany Crescent and Stone Street with three attachments: Brittany Gate – Street Naming.pdf; Appendix A – Street Naming Policy.pdf; Appendix B – Street Name Inventory (unused names).pdf.
  3. item 19.1.Minutes – Heritage Committee August 10, 2023

September 25 DISCUSSION RECAP:

Mayor Prue noted he didn’t have any delegations; he had one presentation, Mr. Norbert Bolger, who he asked to come forward and stated before he does, he needs a motion from council to bring forward items 13.2 and 19.1 which both deal with the matter. 

Bolger stated he was not going to make a presentation; he was just going to be there to answer any questions, that he sent a letter in to the town and everybody has it. He also said he’s talked to some members of council regarding the naming of the street, one of the streets and Britney’s Gate. He went to the heritage committee and got their endorsement on it so he’s here for the final endorsement from council and if there’s any questions he’d be happy to answer. There were no questions.

Councillor Crain said he will be supporting the motion, the heritage committee, which he’s a part of, did endorse it so he thinks it’s only fair that they follow recommendations from their committees; without them he’s not sure why they would even have committees if they’re not going to listen to it. Norbuilt and their family has played an integral part of helping shape our community and he thinks it’s only right that they help them recognize their daughter while also acknowledging our history with Stone Street recognizing the world war two veteran as you make your way into the subdivision and that’s why he’ll be supporting it.

Crain also asked staff, the current street naming policy that we have in place I can’t recall, looking for clarification is that policy out of date or currently being reviewed? Knowing that this was a topic for committee and then council decision, he could’ve just checked for himself.

Later, Bolger wanted to speak and Prue said it had to be a unanimous vote to allow it. Deputy Mayor Gibb spoke against allowing Larry Amlin to speak at the September 11 council meeting, citing a question of equity; Councillor McArthur also voted against. The motion allowing Bolger to speak carried.

FOLLOW UP EMAILS

After the meeting, at 9:01 pm on September 25, 2023, I emailed all members of council and CAO Critchley and requested a copy of Mr. Bolger’s delegate request form as it was not included with the agenda as has been standard practice. I also requested a copy of his letter which was referred to but also not attached to the agenda. 

September 27 at 12:55 PM, Councillor Diane Pouget emailed: I fully support your request. I am also requesting the form and speaking notes Mr. Bolger was required to submit as per the policy. It appears Mr. Bolger submitted his speaking notes to the Heritage Committee, so why wasn’t it submitted to Council and the public as required?

September 27, 2023 7:11 PM, I emailed all members of council and CAO: thank you Councillor Pouget. I really appreciate all your efforts to represent your constituents and to ensure rules are equally and fairly applied to everyone.  

September 28, 2023 12:32 PM Councillor Pouget emailed all members of council and CAO and thanked me; I believe that each and every member of Council should be equally concerned if the proper protocol was followed and should be entitled to view the form and speaking notes by Mr. Bolger, as required by every delegate according to our policy. As a Councillor for the Town of Amherstburg, I am requesting a response to this question.

September 28, 2023, 4:35 PM, Critchley emailed, As Mr. Bolger had indicated to the Clerk’s Office that we would be available for questions and would not be making a formal delegation, he was placed under the “Presentations” section of the meeting. It was clarified when the item came forward that he was there for questions only. I would also note that, as Mr. Bolger was available for questions regarding his application that was before Council, we already had all of his contact information. In all of these circumstances, a form was not required. In addition, section 9.5 of the Procedure By-law states the following: (original yellow highlight)

The Clerk may, from time to time, establish or amend procedures related to the Delegation Process, provided that such procedures do not conflict with the provisions of this By-law.

I am attaching a copy of the Procedure in this regard. With respect to the letter sent to Council by Mr. Bolger, as it contained personal information about an identifiable individual, it was provided to Council as a P & C attachment prior to the meeting and is available in the Council In Camera Share Point folder. Particularly, an email alerting all of Council to the letter were sent on Monday at 3:57pm by the Deputy Clerk and a follow up email was sent to all of Council from the Clerk at 4:41pm. I have attached a copy of that email for your reference. (see emails below).

Ms. Saxon – should you wish to request a copy of the letter submitted to Council please submit a Freedom of Information request.

September 28, 5:09 pm, I emailed members of council and CAO Critchley, an FOI request will not be submitted since I already have Bolger’s letter; it was posted publicly on the heritage committee’s public agenda. but this does indicate the urgency by which council needs to create a routine disclosure and active dissemination policy in keeping with municipal best practices.

Critchley’s attached emails:

Deputy Clerk Sarah Sabihuddin September 25, 2023, 3:57 PM, email to members of council, the CAO and clerk, subject: Council SharePoint Site – Additional In-Camera Documentation – September 25th: An additional item has now been uploaded to the Council SharePoint site in the Special In-Camera folder. This is in relation to tonight’s presentation 9.1 and report item 13.2. 

Clerk September 25, 4:41 PM, email to members of council, the deputy clerk, the CAO, subject: RE: Council SharePoint Site – Additional In-Camera Documentation – September 25th: For additional clarity, this is the correspondence you will have already received from the applicant, Norbert Bolger, during previous communications, but a request was received to provide it under separate cover owing to the personal and confidential details about identifiable individuals noted therein and the sensitivities around those details. Out of an abundance of caution and in respect to the privacy of the associated individuals, we have done so. 

Attitude Check – Hero Worshipping

Posted on by

Excessively praising a person with a disability can be insulting because it implies that you have low expectations of them. For example, calling someone a “hero” or an “inspiration,” though it may seem complimentary, can sound condescending to a person who is simply trying to live their life just like anybody else. 

HIE HELP CENTRE

As a person with disabilities, I regularly encounter physical barriers that provincial legislation mandates to be identified, prevented and removed. But attitudinal barriers offend me the most and there is a list; for example, people make generalized assumptions, behave awkwardly out of ignorance, or adopt an outdated model of disability like pity/charity which leads to patronizing.

During the September 25 council meeting, Councillor Crain spoke briefly and thought it was only right that they help the Bolger family recognize their daughter, Brittany, whereas Councillor McArthur, council’s representative on the accessibility advisory committee, spoke longer and repeated his message throughout that Bolger made a clear, convincing and compelling case.

McArthur weighed in that he was supportive of the motion, acknowledged the town has a policy and stated the developer wasn’t asking for a favour or trying to pull a fast one. He stated Mr. Bolger made a clear, convincing and compelling case to name this after his daughter, who has a remarkable story, and has overcome adversity and serves as a testament to that we are all able that we all have special abilities and that no matter what hand we’re dealt, we can make compelling contributions to our community and she can serve as a role model for youth going into the future. McArthur said he wasn’t going to read Bolger’s letter aloud but he has made a clear and compelling case that the street name will serve a greater good and allow his daughter Brittany to be remembered forever and to serve as a role model for Amherstburg youth and he was happy to support that.

Since I embrace any opportunity to challenge attitudes, I emailed members of council.

the burg watch: As a person with disabilities, and an activist, I encourage you to learn beyond what appears to be very basic training materials you received when elected regarding accessibility and inclusion. 

As you may recall, I pointed out examples of ableism during the election campaign and have since mentioned examples of inappropriate language. As a result of the Brittany’s Gate discussion, I am enclosing a portion of a UN document: 

‘Inclusive language is a key tool in combating ableism and its entrenched manifestations. Ableism is a misguided and biased understanding of disability that leads to the assumption that the lives of persons with disabilities are not worth living. Ableism can take many forms, including harmful language. 

AVOID LABELS AND STEREOTYPES 

Disability is a part of life and of human diversity, not something to be dramatized or sensationalized. Persons with disabilities should therefore not be portrayed as inspirational or “superhuman”. This language implies that it is unusual for persons with disabilities to be successful and productive and to live happy and fulfilling lives. Descriptions of persons with disabilities as “courageous” or “brave” or as having “overcome” their disability are patronizing and should be avoided. Persons with disabilities are the same as everyone else in terms of talents and abilities.’

Councillor Pouget, as usual, was the only one to respond and thanked me for sharing.

The late disability activist Stella Young says it all so well.

Hotel Dispute To Be Continued

Posted on by

This morning’s Case Management Conference regarding the Zoning By-law Amendment application council approved in May for the boutique hotel at 256 Dalhousie resulted in the scheduling of a second video Case Management Conference to be held on November 16 at 10:00 am. If a condensed issues list has been agreed to, a hearing date will be scheduled instead and a public notice will be issued.

When Is A Motion Not A Motion?

Posted on by

When the clerk has been invited to speak to the matter before the motion has been seconded. Amherstburg’s Procedural By-law, MOTION PROCESS states, ‘Where deemed in order by the Chair, every motion shall be moved and seconded before being spoken to, questioned, debated, or put to a vote.’

The report to council on the new 2023 Procedural By-law specifically mentions a form of the word ‘consistent’ twelve times; for example, consistency in the application of rules is crucial for maintaining fairness, transparency, and trust in any organization or community, including the Town of Amherstburg.

At the August 10 Heritage Committee meeting, Frank DiPasquale spoke about Ontario Heritage Ministry nominations to award outstanding service to protect history and heritage; he thought of three people, two are committee members Shirley Curson-Prue and Robert Honor and author Meg Reiner.

DiPasquale moved a motion that these three people get recognized in the Ontario Heritage Ministry and he said he hoped there was a seconder for that.

Instead of asking if there was a seconder, Chair Simon Chamely recognized the clerk, who stated it could be put on the agenda, but whenever you want to introduce new items; introducing and moving those items in the same meeting can sometimes be problematic. So perhaps the best approach here may be to ask administration to investigate this and bring it back so that way it can be before the committee at their next meeting. Even if that’s the September in-camera session, they could deal with it during the public session if that was appropriate.

The September 21 in-camera committee meeting, according to the minutes, dealt with one item: review of expressions of interest and it’s not listed in the October 12 committee meeting agenda.

I couldn’t locate ministry awards, but I did find Lieutenant Governor’s Ontario Heritage Awards and an October 15 deadline for all nomination forms and supporting materials.

More Erroneous Minutes

Posted on by

I felt compelled to email members of council since I know how often rules of procedure are relied on.

The August 10 committee minutes that council approved on September 25 are on the October 12 Heritage Committee meeting agenda for approval.

Councillor Crain mentioned he was on the Heritage Committee and he did move a motion at the August 10 committee meeting, but the minutes do not reflect that his motion carried. i believe Councillor Pouget is correct in stating that public minutes should be corrected at public meetings, as per rules of order, so i trust this will be given consistent attention.

Deputy Mayor Gibb And Councillor McArthur Flip-Flop On Gallery Members Speaking

Posted on by

It was only two weeks earlier, at the September 11 council meeting, that both Gibb and McArthur spoke against and voted against allowing gallery member Larry Amlin to speak; both voted to allow Bolger to speak at the September 25 council meeting.

Mayor Prue acknowledged there were no delegates at the September 25 meeting, just one Presentation – Mr. Norbert Bolger. Prue then asked Bolger to come forward and stated just before he did, he needed a motion from council to bring forward items 13.2 and 19.1 which both deal with the matter at hand; it carried and Prue told Bolger the floor was his.

Bolger then stated he was not going to make a presentation; he was just going to be there to answer any questions; he explained that he sent a letter in to the town and everybody has it. He also said he’s talked to some members of council regarding the naming of the street, one of the streets in Brittney’s Gate. He went to the heritage committee and got their endorsement on it so he was there for the final endorsement from council and if there’s any questions he’d be happy to answer.

Prue asked if there were any questions of Mr. Bolger, stated there were no questions, and as Prue thanked him, Bolger took his seat in the gallery and Prue said it was back to council.

Prue asked if there was any discussion on the issue and there was for approximately 8 minutes; Councillor Pouget spoke, then Councillor Crain, Councillor Courtney, Prue passed the gavel and directly addressed Bolger, who went back up to the podium, then Crain again, Clerk, Deputy CAO, and then Bolger raised his hand and said something inaudible. Prue said it would require the unanimous consent of council.

The motion to allow a member of the gallery to speak carried.

After Bolger briefly spoke, Pouget asked a question and Bolger returned to the podium to answer her question; Prue didn’t call him out of order – Prue echoed Bolger’s answer.

Related: September 11 Council Meeting RECAP Part 1

Inconsistencies: Survey Participants Names Displayed/Not Displayed

Posted on by

I reviewed 10 surveys on talk the burg and only 1 displayed names, along with mine – a survey I completed while logged in as ‘the burg watch.’

I questioned CAO Critchley why the survey with names was posted to the June 22 Accessibility Advisory Committee Agenda titled, Survey Responses Report – Public Consultation 2022, although it states 22 September 2017 – 20 September 2022.

Critchley: This information was freely submitted in a public forum as part of a public discourse. Should you have further concerns, have included the links to the applicable information on the website and she included links to the Multi-Year Accessibility Plan Public Engagement Site, Public Survey from Last Year and Privacy Policy.

After completing the town’s Open Air survey, I emailed all members of council with my critique and my comment, I hope to see all the names and all responses of all survey participants publicly posted as CAO Critchley advised this information was freely submitted in a public forum as part of a public discourse.

Why The Fuss About Erroneous Minutes?

Posted on by

There was no fuss when then-Councillor Prue mentioned erroneous minutes regarding his wife during a 2022 regular council meeting so why all the fuss when Councillor Pouget rightfully notes errors? After all, minutes are legal records and should be accurate. The bigger question is why did no other council member note the errors?

Councillor McArthur stated it was adequate time to address this before this evening. without calling staff to task in public so he was going to oppose a motion to defer.

McArthur was present at the 2022 meeting when Prue noted errors; he also received my email noting the 2022 accessibility committee minutes error pertaining to a question by Shirley Prue. The result of my email? The minutes were not corrected prior to the council meeting and no one brought up the error during the council meeting.

Not only is it standard procedure for the chair to ask if there are any errors or omissions since only the governing body can make corrections and approve minutes, but the Municipal Act states one of council’s roles is ‘to ensure the accountability and transparency of the operations of the municipality, including the activities of the senior management of the municipality.’

Deputy Mayor Gibb chimed in with his judgment and concurred with McArthur. Gibb stated It could have been corrected with an email and that it could have been handled differently in his opinion. The Ontario Ombudsman investigated Amherstburg council back in 2016 and recommended members of council for the Town of Amherstburg should avoid exercising the power or authority of council or laying the groundwork to do so through email communications.

It would be more professional and efficient if members of council would just support/not support duly moved motions without speeches or judgments.

As mentioned in this post, Minutes Need To Be Corrected, the September 11 minutes, attached to the September 25 agenda contained errors: CAO Critchley was marked as present when she was absent, the wording of some of Councillor Pouget’s motions was incorrect. Words were omitted or substituted despite Pouget providing hard copies of her motions.

Related: Should Minutes Be Consistently Corrected?