Category Archives: Commentaries

Equal Access Movement 20 Years Old

Posted on by

Two occasions cause me to reflect on my campaign to improve accessibility in my community.

Last week the AODA Alliance gathered at Queen’s Park to celebrate the November 29, 1994 birth of Ontario’s tireless grassroots movement for a fully accessible Ontario and December 3 is the International Day for People with Disabilities.

Prior to the ODA 2001, I endured a decade long battle with the Town of Amherstburg to obtain equal access to the town’s historic Carnegie library. Funding opportunities were lost because the town prioritized other amenities even when the grants specified accessibility came first.

Finally, as a result of my human rights settlement in 2004, an elevator was installed at the library. I was not invited, but the council of the day held a ribbon cutting ceremony and unveiled a plaque crediting council.

A second human rights complaint, merged with the library complaint, resulted in the creation of two accessible parking spaces in the rear parking lot of General Amherst High School.

I recently filed another complaint when I encountered difficulty entering a physiotherapy clinic in a building owned by a corporation. Following a September 2013 Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario Hearing, a February 20, 2014 decision was issued against two Respondents: the landord, 1762668 Ontario Inc., owned by Rene and Anne Rota, and the tenant Anna Maria Fiorito Physiotherapy.

The Tribunal ordered both respondents to pay monetary compensation and install an automatic door with a 4 inch diameter push button. Additionally, the landlord was ordered to retain a consultant with expertise in human rights, disability and access who will provide training to Mr. Rota, and any managers, on the landlord’s obligations under the Code with respect to accommodating disability, and the landlord must provide to the applicant by June 1, 2014, a copy of a letter from the consultant verifying that the training is completed.

The adjudicator noted, “It is obvious that the landlord does not appreciate its obligations under the Code with respect to making its facilities accessible to people with disabilities.”

Mr. Rota did not comply with the training requirement by June 1, nor did he respond to my July 21, 2014 letter reminding him of his obligation.

Any discussion regarding the removal of barriers should include the lack of redress for the non-compliance of an HRTO Order without imposing any additional bureaucracy and/or expense to the victim of discrimination.

Commentary by Linda Saxon

Procedural By-law Status Unknown

Posted on by

Commentary by Linda Saxon

This was written in response to Anthony Leardi’s comments in his RTT Guest Column November 5, 2014.

I do not believe the issue is the Mayor’s postponement of meetings since the council approved procedural by-law clause provides him with the authority to do so; that is not a loophole.

And yes, ‘everyone still gets a pay cheque’ because of his or her salaried positions, elected or otherwise, regardless of how many meetings were held or cancelled.

As for the lawyer being called, council was free to accept or reject his advice.

Since the clerk did not adhere to the mandatory clause to call a meeting according to both the Municipal Act and the procedural by-law, the issue is why council allowed the non-compliance and what, if any, action it took as a result.

A new procedural by-law was to have been approved back in August but due to a lengthy meeting, there was a motion to defer the report and by-law to September 8, although it was not included on that agenda.

There was no notice to the public regarding the draft Procedural By-law because apparently there is no requirement for notice.

Regardless, I submitted my comprehensive review to members of council on September 7.

On October 7, I requested the status on my procedural by-law submission that no one had responded to.

On October 20, I submitted my review to the clerk, who acknowledged that it would be added to the next scheduled meeting, which I assumed was November 3 as a result of the petition.

The 2008 Procedural By-law has not changed in six years, so why the current council would approve a new one defies logic.

Hopefully, the new council will examine job descriptions, areas of responsibility, codes of conduct and actually be transparent and accountable.

Amherstburg Police Patrol Zones Changed After Amalgamation

Posted on by

Commentary by Linda Saxon

Following amalgamation, the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services’ decision regarding the ‘new’ policing proposal was, “From the standpoint of staffing, deployment and supervision, the proposal overall appears sound, and if the proposal is implemented as presented, it should allow for adequate and effective policing in the Town of Amherstburg.”

Three patrol zones were proposed with 24 hour a day policing and a maximum strength per 12 hour shift of six officers: 3 in Zone 1, 1 in each of Zones 2 and 3. Another officer would support all three zones as may be required.

The minimum strength per 12 hour shift was to be one officer per zone with a minimum strength of four officers until 4:00 a.m.

By 2010, as noted on page 8 of the Amherstburg Police Service Annual Report, “The Town is divided into 2 patrol zones ensuring that all areas receive an ongoing police presence.”

In a December 9, 2011 commentary, Amherstburg Police Chief Berthiaume Tight-lipped About Deployment, I asked, how will we know if we’re getting the service that was proposed if there is no accountability?

The question is just as relevant today; the only way to determine the best policing option for our community is to undertake a full comparison and obtain an OPP costing. Council’s decision should not be a subjective one based on speculation or fears, but an objective one based on facts and figures.

Five of the seven essex county municipalities are policed by the OPP as are 324 of the 444 Ontario municipalities; what have we got to lose?

No Commitment To Remove OPP Clause In Police Contract – Followup

Posted on by

Commentary by Linda Saxon

Current Amherstburg Police Services Board member and council candidate Pauline Gemmell’s responses to questions about the OPP clause in the police contract were set out in a previous post.

The Employment Standards Act does not apply to police officers.

No Commitment To Remove OPP Clause In Police Contract

Posted on by

Commentary by Linda Saxon

Readers of the burg watch have submitted three separate questions regarding the contentious Amherstburg police contract clause about switching specifically to OPP policing.

Current Police Services Board member and mayoral candidate John Sutton has not answered any questions, nor has current Police Services Board member and council candidate Frank Cleminson.

Current Police Services Board member and council candidate Pauline Gemmell responded, but did not answer specific questions or commit to the removal of the clause.

Regarding Gemmell’s statement, “The buyout clause is outlined in the contract. As with any corporation preparing to lay off large numbers (this would be situation here) the Employment Standards Act prescribes the basic requirements for any payout,” follow up questions were emailed: are you suggesting that there would be lay offs at the police service? can you provide me with the section of the Employment Standards Act that prescribes the basic requirements for any such payout?

Gemmell’s response is, “The ESA provides for basic but in the case of a contract those requirements are typically more than what ESA provides. Have you spoken to Chief Berthieume about this? He is very helpful when anyone from the public asks questions.”

The three questions in full, along with Gemmell’s responses are:

Question 6:  If elected, will you commit to council obtaining an OPP costing and if appointed to the police services board, will you commit to removing the OPP takeover clause in the police contract? If running for re-election, why did you not consider doing the above?

The current costing model for OPP is changing and as such will be difficult to get a clear cost for OPP at this time. I think that council should always be looking at the cost of all services and be looking to less expensive and equal quality alternatives. We have a great Police service here in Amherstburg and there are many benefits that we enjoy as a result of having a local police service. Our officers are skilled and dedicated to this community.

Question 13: The Town now is in the process of negotiating a new contract with our local police force. Within this contract (expires Dec 2014) is a clause which if activated could cost our town dearly! What is your knowledge of this buyout clause? what is your understanding of the rational behind the inclusion of it in our contract? What and how many officers would be involved? What would be the cost to our town if enforced one day? From my understanding, we are talking anywhere from 8-10 million dollars would be paid out to officers changing uniforms, not losing jobs? Your thoughts please!

I believe that our Police provide an excellent service. The buyout clause is outlined in the contract. As with any corporation preparing to lay off large numbers (this would be situation here) the Employment Standards Act prescribes the basic requirements for any payout. Beyond that the town would be required to honor provisions found in the contract.

We have a good and effective police service in our community. The cost factor needs to be discussed once the negotiations but other factors also must be considered along with the cost factor. It’s important that we all know what would be the result of having OPP in our community instead of our own police services. We need to look to other communities who have done this. Where are the officers dispatched from? There is a new costing formula and that also needs to be considered.

Question 18:  Do you believe the Poison Pill Clause should be eliminated in the Police Contract in order to get an OPP costing to compare the costs of policing of OPP versus Amherstburg Police.

Having a costing for alternative services is not dependent on a clause in a contract. The police services is currently beginning to prepare to negotiate a new contract and as such this is something that should be considered during these negotiations.

Aldo DiCarlo On The Use Of The Burg Watch Answers

Posted on by

Question: This is not so much a question but a commentary I guess.  After researching websites for campaign issues, I was directed to the mayoral candidate’s Facebook page who chose not to participate in answering theburgwatch.  I have no issue with not answering, that’s a personal choice.  What I do have issue with is them reading all of the candidate’s answers, taking them out of context, and then manipulating them to a perspective that implies incompetence.  Perhaps it is a desperate attempt to steal votes or perhaps that’s who they are.  Either way, hopefully the voters will question that interpretation before making a judgement.

Candidates’ Website Accessibility Issues Revisited

Posted on by

Commentary by Linda Saxon

I am not expressing my opinion as Chair of the Essex County Accessibility Advisory Committee, but rather as an individual with a disability and advocate.

On August 21, I mentioned that Lora Petro’s and Ken Grant’s websites had problems with accessibility issues that may present barriers to persons with disabilities.

Since then, mayoral candidate John Sutton’s site was activated and all three candidates were advised of the barriers.

The results of pointing out the problem?

Lora Petro – Answered, Changes Made
Lora Petro quickly made changes; although a minor issue was found, it was also corrected when pointed out.

Note: thank you!

Ken Grant – Answered, No Changes Made
October 2, response: 
I understand your concerns about my website, I do support residents/persons with accessibility/disability issues.  My website was not created by a professional web builder, I had purchased the site space thru a company (host) where you build the site yourself.  After purchasing my space and building the site with the software they provide I began looking at the “Options Category” before activating the site.  I noticed that there was no “Option” to allow such capabilities.  I contacted the company to see if there was anything that can be done for persons with disabilities who wanted to view the site.  The company had advised me that there was no option available for what I wanted and that I would have to hire a code developer thru a professional business to revamp my site.  Unfortunately the cost was extremely high and out of my price range for the two months that the site would be active.  Again I apologize!
Ken Grant

Note: I expect candidates to be knowledgeable about accessibility because it is a municipal issue and council is the decision making body. However, when a candidate’s platform includes, “Continue to develop and support accessibility issues,” I expect more. WordPress.com is free, domain registration is minimal and so is WordPress for Badeyes: A Beginners Guide at $9.99. The guide provides information about how to secure a domain name, network host, and install and maintain WordPress for both individuals and enterprises. The language is simple, lucid, for those who use a Screen Reader or those who don’t.

Alternatively, a web developer could have been hired for under $500.

John Sutton – No Answer, No Changes Made
Twice I contacted Mr. Sutton. In addition to the site accessibility issues, I asked, “if you’re offering rides to the polls, does that include accessible transportation?” I subsequently remInded Mr. Sutton, “to date you have neither answered my question nor corrected the issues.”

Note: One could conclude that Mr. Sutton is indifferent.

IS IT TIME FOR LOCAL AODA ALLIANCE CHAPTERS?

Posted on by

Commentary by Linda Saxon
Published in Accessibility News – THE PREMIER ONLINE MAGAZINE FOR DISABILITY ACCESSIBILITY

The AODA Alliance has been a very effective voice for the disability community, raising awareness of barrier removal with provincial leaders, but has it trickled down?

I feel somewhat isolated and frustrated that action taken at the provincial level has little effect on my community – a small southwestern Ontario town that boasts about its history and the need to preserve it.

For over two decades, I appeared before town council, wrote letters to the editor, and campaigned for a more inclusive community. To date, I have had to rely on the human rights complaints system twice to have my rights enforced.

Following the AODA Alliance’s suggestion, I urged candidates to commit to, among other items, a municipal policy that no public funds will ever be used to create or perpetuate barriers against persons with disabilities.

Eight of the twenty-nine candidates responded; only one would support a policy, one would “commit to not place public barriers against persons with disabilities, unless it is for THEIR safety” and one would obtain further details before committing to a policy that would potentially limit the possibilities of the entire population.

In answer to the other accessibility related questions, not one candidate provided any specifics as to how she or he would improve accessibility. Some offered to consult with the Accessibility Advisory Committee or improve accessibility as budget permits.

As for the question to commit to specific plans to ensure fully accessible public transit and taxi services, a couple believed in full accessibility; others felt a taxi service is private enterprise and therefore we must always be careful in how and what we legislate if we are adding costs then the enterprise may not be viable and they simply shut down, thus affecting an even greater percentage of the population.

Another stated that public transportation, accessible or not, should not be a cost born by the town.

I also sought pledges from the candidates that no candidate will agree to attend an All Candidates event to be held in an inaccessible location. Only two of the twenty-nine responded; it has been there for some time, but personal assurances were made to have someone there to open doors for anyone who requires assistance and one will try to facilitate the installation of accessible entrances for the future.

Three candidates were advised their websites had accessibility issues; one made the required changes, one did not respond and one said he was told by the company he purchased the space from that he had no option other than to hire a code developer to revamp his site. Furthermore, the cost was extremely high and out of his price range for the two months that the site would be active, but he apologized.

I am really tired of hearing apologies and half-assed commitments to move forward; I want action taken regarding my right to equal access without having to fight for it or waiting for it to happen.

I would like for regional chapters of the AODA Alliance to be established with the hope that local voices would be just as effective at the local level as David Lepofsky’s is at the provincial level.

Proposed Procedural By-law Flawed

Posted on by

The town’s proposed procedural by-law was deferred to September 8 from the August 11 council meeting due to time restrictions, according to Ms. Parker; I could not locate the by-law on the September 8 agenda but there is a link from the town’s website, of course, to an external link. 

In an earlier post, Public Input Not Welcome? I mentioned Phipps’ stated, “There was no notice to the public regarding the draft Procedural By-law. Incidentally, there is no requirement for notice.”

Despite input not being sought, I am submitting my opinion to the current council, not as the Chair of the Essex County Accessibility Advisory Committee, but as a ratepayer and individual with a disability. To summarize my concerns:

  • The document is difficult to navigate; there is no index and the numbering system deviates from the traditional numbering of legislation: sections, subsections, paragraphs, subparagraphs, clauses, subclauses, schedules, appendices or forms.
  • The place of meetings is not listed contrary to the Municipal Act.
  • The proposed definition of committee conflicts with the Accessibility For Ontarians With Disabilities Act 2005
  • “special meeting” is defined, but “meeting” should be since it is titled a By-law to govern the proceedings of Council, the conduct of its members and the calling of meetings.
  • I object to the latter portion of the proposed “Special Meeting” definition: “Special Meeting” means a meeting not scheduled in accordance with the approved calendar/schedule of meetings; and further includes any meeting of Council called prior to the regular session of Council at every regularly scheduled meeting. This is not in keeping with accountability, transparency and notices to the public of meetings.
  • I would question why the town’s procedural by-law would exceed S. 240 (Mayor or Clerk) and include “the CAO may, at any time, summon a special meeting.”
  • Regarding Special In-Camera Council Meetings: the discretionary and mandatory exceptions to public meetings needs to be noted since “may be held” and “shall be held” in camera have disparate meanings and are set out in the Act.
  • Public Notice of Meetings does not state dates and times of notices on the town’s website, just that agendas with attachments will be available on the town’s website; however, one must navigate through a series of links and it is not verified that the available documents, once located, are accessible. There is no reason whatsoever for not posting the agenda on the actual website.
  • Council needs to consider persons with disabilities when setting rules for delegates; for example, insisting that everyone provide the Clerk with written material poses a barrier as defined in Section 2 of the Accessibility For Ontarians With Disabilities Act: “barrier” means anything that prevents a person with a disability from fully participating in all aspects of society because of his or her disability, including a physical barrier, an architectural barrier, an information or communications barrier, an attitudinal barrier, a technological barrier, a policy or a practice; (“obstacle”).
  • Why is there a need to state the Clerk and/or CAO may refuse or defer the delegation based on the subject matter to be presented? Is this not contrary to open government, transparency and accountability?

Commentary by Linda Saxon

AON Hewitt’s Services To Amherstburg

Posted on by

On August 13, I requested information from the town hall regarding the role of AON Hewitt in relation to the town; the date the service was acquired; the annual cost and the length of the contract. The bureaucratic process and email correspondence was included in an earlier post.

On today’s date, I received the AON Agreement ‘Engagement of Services Agreement between the Town and AON Hewitt.’

However, not all of my questions were answered and since the town switched services in 2012, I have requested earlier documentation as well.

So, if we’re not a metropolitan area and we have competent town staff, why do we need to pay for AON Hewitt’s services?

Commentary by Linda Saxon