Now that the council has completed its first year of the term, what do you think? Are you satisfied with the job they’re doing? Have they kept campaign promises? Flip-flopped? Represented everyone equally? Or are you looking forward to the next election?
New Windsor Police Deputy Chief
Amherstburg Mayor Michael Prue is quoted in a CBC article, “There will be those who will say, ah, look at this, and there will be others who will recognize again what he has done over his whole lifetime,” Prue said. “I think the majority of people will probably understand that, there are some who never will.”
I’m one that never will understand. Crowley wasn’t going 10 over the speed limit. Police officers are not held to a higher standard, but they have to abide by the same behaviour as anyone else that they dole out tickets to for misbehaving; especially when it’s a more serious offence.
CBC reports, Windsor police name Jason Crowley as permanent deputy chief amid possible external review.
Why Have Committees?
I wonder what Councillor Crain will do. At the September 25 council meeting, he said he would be supporting the motion, regarding Bolger’s request; that he was on the heritage committee, 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.
Well now admin is recommending Council NOT APPROVE the recommendation from the Environmental Advisory Committee as presented, and;
Council DIRECT Administration to ensure the current Official Plan update includes policies to allow for the introduction of various climate friendly development requirements to ensure the Town is creating the necessary means in which to require these types of investments in development.
Shouldn’t the committee recommendation go before council and then council direct admin for a report?
Read the October 23 Supplementary Agenda.
Why Go In-Camera?
Amherstburg is highlighted twice as case examples in the same Ontario Ombudsman Open Meetings Guide for Municipalities that I shared yesterday:
Matters that can be discussed in closed session under another Act – s. 239(2)(g)
Town of Amherstburg (June 2018): While staff suggested this exception applied because a request for proposals (RFP) could have been discussed in private under the Police Services Act, there was no evidence that council considered the application of this exception, or that the RFP had been discussed in closed session by the town’s police services board.
Security of municipal property – s. 239(2)(a)
Town of Amherstburg (June 2018): Discussion about seeking bids for policing services did not fit within the exception, as it did not deal with potential threats, loss, or damage to municipal property.
Must all municipal meetings be open to the public?
Yes, with some limited exceptions.
Twelve of the exceptions are discretionary, meaning it is not mandatory to close meetings to deal with these subjects. When in doubt, open the meeting. (original emphasis).
Meetings may be closed if the discussion is about:
- The security of the property of the municipality [s. 239(2)(a)]
- Personal matters about an identifable individual, including municipal employees [s. 239(2)(b)]
- A proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality [s. 239(2)(c)]
- Labour relations or employee negotiations [s. 239(2)(d)]
- Litigation or potential litigation, including matters before administrative tribunals, affecting the municipality [s. 239(2)(e)]
- Advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose [s. 239(2)(f)]
- A matter in respect of which a council, board, committee or other body may hold a closed meeting under another piece of legislation [s. 239(2)(g)]
- Information supplied in confidence to the municipality by another level of government [s. 239(2)(h)]
- Third-party information supplied in confidence to the municipality, which, if disclosed, could significantly prejudice a competitive position or interfere with negotiations (e.g., a trade secret or scientific, technical, commercial, fnancial or labour relations information) [s. 239(2)(i)]
- Information (e.g., a trade secret or scientific, technical, commercial, or financial information) that belongs to the municipality and has monetary value [s. 239(2)(j)]
- A position, plan, procedure, criteria, or instruction to be applied to negotiations [s. 239(2)(k)]
- Educating or training members of the council, a local board or committee [s. 239(3.1)]
Mandatory exceptions:
Meetings must be closed if they are about: - The consideration of a request under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, if the council, board, commission or body is the head of an institution for the purposes of that Act [s. 239(3)(a)]
- An ongoing investigation respecting the municipality by the Ontario Ombudsman, an appointed municipal ombudsman, or an appointed closed meeting investigator [s. 239(3)(b)]
Lack Of Audio = Lack Of Transparency
I asked CAO Critchley for an explanation for the August 10 Amherstburg Heritage Committee meeting audio starting at 45:40. Just to be sure it wasn’t my computer, other residents verified the same.
This morning Critchley answered, “A technical issue prevented the capture of audio for the first portion of this meeting but was able to be resolved later in the meeting.
The Ontario Ombudsman Open Meetings Guide for Municipalities states:
What are the objectives of the open meeting rules?
The open meeting requirements set out in section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001 permit the public to observe municipal government in progress. The Supreme Court of Canada answered this question in its decision in the 2007 case, London (City) v. RSJ Holdings Inc. The judges noted “the public’s demand for more accountable municipal government” and stated that open meetings are essential to “robust democratic legitimacy” of local administrations. They also observed that s. 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001 “was intended to increase public confidence in the integrity of local government by ensuring the open and transparent exercise of municipal power.” (original emphasis).
Also from the Guide:
“The democratic legitimacy of municipal decisions does not spring solely from periodic elections, but also from a decision-making process that is transparent, accessible to the public, and mandated by law.”
– Hon. Madam Justice Louise Charron, Supreme Court of Canada
Santa Is Not Ableist!
Although not everyone could complete a timed 5k including Santa at 1,752 years old.
Amherstburg town council approved the Super Santa Walk/Run for November 18 at its June 26 meeting; the video of that discussion seems to be unavailable – one can view the item before and after it.
In a July 25 email to accessibility at ERCA, I asked if Santa was ableist and if the Santa Run/Walk excludes persons with disabilities. I shared my thought that holding a timed race/walk seems contrary to ERCA’s policy, ‘to provide for service delivery in a way that preserves the dignity and independence of persons with disabilities.’
I also asked if no one thought to name the event Walk/Run/Roll without it being timed to see how fast participants can walk/run.
I received an auto response from Danielle Stuebing and nothing further.
On September 28 ERCA announced the event on its website and Danielle Stuebing was quoted, “While the event has always been inclusive, based on feedback received, this year ‘Wheel’ has been added to the title to ensure it is abundantly clear that all are welcome,” Breault Stuebing adds. “For this event, ‘wheel’ refers to wheelchairs, scooters used for mobility assistance, walkers and strollers.”
So how hard is it to add one word?
ERCA’s website advertises it as walk/run/wheel and then omits the wheel in the description.
Visit Amherstburg also omits the word wheel and advertises it as Super Santa Walk/Run.
Councillor Allaire’s website includes an announcement that omits the wheel.
Race Roster website announces the walk/run/wheel and also omits the wheel in the description; the logo, also used on Allaire’s site, omits the wheel.
People With Disabilities Are Not ‘Special’
During the October 12 Heritage Committee meeting, Frank DiPasquale made comments about Brittany Bolger that, to me, were offensive.
The heritage committee was discussing the street naming policy when the town’s heritage planner mentioned other municipalities implement an asset naming policy and Councillor Crain was working on a motion wording.
Listen to the audio.
DiPasquale mentioned generally they use those who served in our military and those who gave up their lives and he agrees with that. He mentioned when Mr. Bolger came and wanted to name his subdivision after his daughter, Brittany, and I believe Council followed through with that, the concern was that he had she is an individual with special needs and disabilities, she soldiers on every day with a positive attitude. He didn’t think there’s not anyone in uniform alive or not that would not tip their hat and be honoured to have their street named after this young lady. He suggested there’ll be other examples of that coming in the future where there’s people that may have special needs or special challenges and he thought they should keep that in mind too.
DiPasquale was a 2022 municipal candidate that, like all other candidates, should have received accessibility materials from the town.
Once again, I emailed council members that this clearly indicates the need for more training, although he should have received it by now. I also shared:
COMMON MYTHS ABOUT DISABILITIES:
Pity
People feel sorry for the person with a disability, which tends to lead to patronizing attitudes. Persons with disabilities generally don’t want pity and charity, just equal opportunity to make their own way and live independently.
Hero Worship
People consider someone with a disability who lives independently or pursues studies to be brave or “special” for overcoming a disability. Most persons with disabilities do not want accolades for performing day-to-day tasks.
Worth repeating: the late disability activist Stella Young says it all so well; one of my favourite videos.
Councillor Crain Didn’t Correct Errors
On October 3, I emailed council members: the august 10 heritage committee meeting minutes are listed on the october 12 heritage committee meeting agenda for approval, although council approved the august 10 heritage committee minutes at the september 25 council meeting. 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.
Wrong.
At the October 10 council meeting, Councillor Pouget was the only one to note the motion wasn’t marked as being carried.
The clerk said yes, there was a typo. That was more than a typo – it was an omission. Meeting chairs ask if there are any errors or omissions, not if there are any typos.
Even though Pouget noted the error, the same erroneous August 10 Heritage Committee minutes were on the October 12 Heritage Committee agenda.
While Councillor Crain was present at the October 12 Heritage Committee meeting, he didn’t mention the error of the missing ‘motion carried’ or his misquoted motion.
These are typos: the October 12 Heritage Committee agenda states:
8. CORRESPONDENCE
- That the following correspondence BE RECEIVED:
- That the following correspondence BE RECEIVED:
and
8.2 River Town Tiles Article – River Canard Bridge Plaque
Where Are Third Quarter Reports?
Nancy Atkinson, on behalf of the Amherstburg Residents’ Forum was a delegate to council on June 12 to present three residents’ concerns.
As a result, council carried resolutions:
June 12, 2023 Council Resolutions:
Resolution #20230612-007
Moved By Councillor Pouget
Seconded By Councillor Allaire
That Council DIRECT Administration to bring a full report regarding no parking at the clock at Kings Navy Yard Park. The Mayor put the Motion. Motion Carried.
Report coming to Council in Q3 2023.
Resolution #20230612-008
Moved By Councillor Pouget
Seconded By Councillor McArthur
That Council DIRECT Administration to bring back a report regarding a Routine Disclosure Policy.
The Mayor put the Motion.Motion Carried.
Report coming to Council in Q3 2023.
Councillor Pouget Questions Cheque Registry
Just like the September 11 council meeting agenda, the October 10 Regular Council Meeting agenda listed UNFINISHED BUSINESS but linked to the cheque registry.
At the October 10 council meeting, Councillor Diane Pouget asked questions about the Cheque Registry that was mistakenly labelled Unfinished Business so the majority of the public would not be aware of this document.
Mayor Prue noted the error that the UNFINISHED BUSINESS was actually the cheque registry list and asked if anyone had any questions on the cheque registry list.
Councillor Pouget asked about listings on page 9 pertaining to Anne Marie Frauts Professional Corporation Legal Fees for:
- 40,000.00
- 3495.23
- 5425.77
- 232,000.00
- 4340.62 For a grand total of $285,261.62 just for the month of August
I believe it was the treasurer that answered, since staff often don’t identify themselves, this is legal fees and a professional corporation for the legal fees and has been discussed in camera with council.
Mayor Prue said he didn’t hear that and asked it has to be or it has been? I didn’t hear who answered but Prue then said twice, it was, it was ok.
Councillor Pouget said she didn’t recall hearing of that legal corporation.
The total does not include the legal fees for Mousseau DeLuca, so it appears the total for legal fees is $323,894.89.
Councillor Pouget campaigned ‘to regain the loss of trust by many of our taxpayers.’ Following her motion to reinstate accounts payable on public agendas, council and administration discussed it for about fifteen minutes at the December 5, 2022 council meeting. Read the full post: Accounts Payable On Agenda: A Matter of Trust. Deputy Mayor Gibb was the lone dissenting vote.
Is it any wonder the public doesn’t question any items under Cheque Registry, when it is labelled Unfinished Business?
the burg watch 