The following letter was delivered by Grace Marsh to the Editor(s) of The Auroran and The Banner and copied to the Aurora Citizen Blog.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views of the AURORA CITIZEN.
Council created and approved their own Code of Conduct. Some felt the Oath of Office wasn’t enough . Apparently, they believe they need more in order to “control” some Members of Council from expressing opinions that don’t mirror theirs.
Council approves the hiring of an Integrity Commissioner. Puts someone at the ready to “investigate” any complaint that may be lodged under their Code. His bio and experience as posted on the Town website is impressive.
Next Council approves the hiring of Aird & Berlis, at Town cost, to help get ready ammunition in order to prepare a formal complaint against Councillor Buck under the Code.
6 members of Council file a formal complaint against Councillor Buck. 2 do not participate. No surprise who the 6 are. The complaint is placed on the Town’s website and paid advertisements are taken out in 2 local papers. Apparently Councillor Buck has levelled “unmerited public criticism of staff”. So much for confidentiality in the process.
On July 30th, I called Mr. Nitkin directly on his confidential line to let him know that I was willing to provide information for his investigation should he be interested. I actually do have firsthand experience with how other Members of this Council , including the Mayor have criticised staff. Mr. Nitkin advised me that he was unable to discuss Council’s complaint as he had not yet either accepted or rejected the complaint that was advertised by Council. A fair and appropriate response in my view. My feeling from the conversation, although Mr. Nitkin said nothing specific, was that it may not be long before he would make that decision.
Just 7 days later, on August 6th, Rogers First Local broadcasts that Councillor Buck believes a decision has been made and while looking for a copy, it appears she is stonewalled. On the same broadcast the Mayor admits that an email was sent to the Director of Corporate Services, and a copy was sent to the Director’s assistant (the Deputy Clerk). She further stated nothing would be disclosed and it could be up to 90 days before anything is made public. Seems to me that a staff member (the assistant to the designated person) getting a copy should not be a big deal. Why should that stop the Councillor accused from receiving a copy?
Later that same night, there is a Special Council Meeting at which, according to the public minutes, the same 6 Councillors that lodged the complaint, spent 5 hours and 12 minutes behind closed doors on 2 “personal” items and the results are:
The Integrity Commissioner is removed. Any mention of him is gone from the Towns’ website by the next day, and it’s directed that more money will be spent recruiting a new Integrity Commissioner. We (the people paying the bill for all this) still don’t know what his decision was or why it must be secret. Council’s complaint was made very public, in two newspapers, at our expense, but we are not entitled to know the result.
Draw your own conclusions:
- Would the decision put those who orchestrated the complaint into a bad light,
perhaps?
- Did he reject their complaint outright?
- Did he come to the conclusion that it was purely political?
- How can they explain promoting the high standards and experience of Mr. Nitkin and so easily dismiss him?
- Are they looking to hire a “different” Integrity Commissioner who will accept their
complaint?
- How many will they have to go through before they find the “right” one?
- How much will this cost us in the end in money and time? A staggering
number, I’m sure.
I have certainly drawn my own conclusions, and quite frankly this whole affair simply does not pass the smell test. But I’m also not surprised.
Grace Marsh
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.