For folks not familiar with the history of the firing of our Integrity Commissioner, here is a rundown as well as some of the links where we have covered this issue, plus access to comments from your fellow citizens.

After a long search for an Integrity Commissioner, Nov 25 2008, Aurora finally declares David Nitkin is our guy.

After months of wrangling Mr Nitkin’s contract is signed June 18, 7 months after announcing his selection. No rationale is provided for the delay.

The first complaint is lodged when 6 members of Council signed a formal complaint against Councillor Buck for alleged comments against staff. Links to the original information on the town website are available through this link.

Report returned from Mr Nitkin However, report is not issued to public, but available internally to certain staff and possibly select Council members.

2 days later Mr Nitkin is fired.

Initial view of report indicates that Mr Nitkin would not respond to the complaint because the issues are deemed political in nature. In his report he indicated “It is the decision of my office that this statement of complaint, as is, is unacceptable and that as is, no investigation or inquiry shall take place.”

Mainstream media picks up the issue. CBC News, Toronto Sun, Era Banner

Latest activity is the report is published at a General Committee meeting — which conveniently is not televised — versus the required Council Meeting and Mayor Morris is planning a statement on “behalf of Council” which she wrote and published in the agenda for the same meeting the report from Nitkin was tabled.

This tactic handily published “her statement” (Item 23 on General Committee agenda) before anyone on Council saw it and avoided having to solicit Council approval before her statement was made public — effectively preventing even her faithful disciples from having any influence on her message. A real team player!

If you are available, try to make the meeting Tuesday evening. It should be interesting.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

The recent Banner article captures a number of thoughts shared by Councillor McRoberts at the latest Council meeting. They seemed worthy of consideration — possibly the balance of Council should give them consideration before dismissing as quickly as Mayor Morris did Tuesday night.

McRoberts questioned why Mr. Nitkin’s report appeared on a non-televised General Committee meeting when when the code of conduct clearly stipulates it should have appeared on the first council meeting following its receipt. Two such meetings have occurred prior to the Tuesday meeting — including on that very evening.

Mayor Morris accepted no responsibility for the decision and placed the blame squarely on departing Director of Corporate Service Ms. King.

He further suggested it would make sense to re-evaluate the code and look for opportunities for improvement. He also suggested an accountability and transparency committee — not made up of Councillors — be formed to review the code of conduct to determine if there are sections that conflict with the Ontario Municipal Act. Such a committee should also be charged with finding a new integrity commissioner.

Councillor Collins-Mrakas has also previously suggested that a province wide approach makes sense. Since having each municipality craft their own has clearly been a disaster, this would make sense. It would also make sense to have the Integrity Commissioner be independent from municipalities (like the OMB) to prevent exactly what has happened in Aurora from repeating itself.

McRoberts also suggested that since the complaint against Councillor Buck had been declined by Nitkin, that it would make sense to remove the complaint against her from the Town website since there was “an assumption of guilt instead of a presumption of innocence”.

Not surprising, Mayor Morris quickly disagreed on all aspects. She indicated that at this point (i.e. since they were not successful), more time should be focused on doing the town’s business than on wrangling with technicalities. How convenient. Now that the Mayor et al have not accomplished their objective, they want to refocus on “town business”.

For example, Monday, she will be ramping up the PR to promote herself for her role in Right to Dry.

A Press Release was posted on the Town website on Wed Sept 9 announcing “As a result of their leadership role in the successful Right to Dry campaign, Mayor Phyllis Morris, Council and the Town of Aurora will be profiled as a Canadian leader in a movement to allow people the freedom to make more environmentally conscious choices.”

This must be the important town business she refers to. More media coverage for herself.

It’s more like a ploy to distract people from the real issues in the town. Plus, another opportunity to increase her profile.

Well, rest assured Mayor Morris, your profile is front and centre. You have generated more media from your recent leadership on the handling of the firing of our Integrity Commissioner than through the clothesline debate. Your place in history in Aurora and the province is assured.

We should all be careful what we wish for 😉

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Council spat gets uglier in Aurora
Sep 09, 2009 04:30 AM
Gail Swainson – Staff Reporter

Aurora Mayor Phyllis Morris is planning on taking her version of events surrounding the firing of the town’s integrity commissioner directly to the citizens.

David Nitkin was fired in July, a day after issuing a report on a complaint lodged by five members of the council, plus the mayor, against a fellow politician.

The complaint, over Councillor Evelyn Buck’s outspoken blog, was “unacceptable” and perhaps sparked by political interference, Nitkin said in his report, which council released and dealt with publicly for the first time last night.

Nitkin didn’t rule on the merits of the code of conduct complaint against Buck, saying it was “ill formed, incomplete and inappropriate.” But he was otherwise blunt in his assessment of the reasons behind the complaint, using words such as “vexatious” and “frivolous.”

The complaint was filed after posts on Buck’s blog, called “Our Town and its Business,” criticized staff for not following council procedures, something Morris says is untrue.

The sordid public spat has caused a deep rift on council and sparked a public debate in sleepy Aurora.

Morris had issued a statement saying the town’s conduct code states council members should “refrain” from criticizing staff.

But after a committee backed her plan last night, she said “it’s time council put out a statement.”

If Mayor Morris is so concerned about openness and transparency and putting out a statement — why doesn’t Council publish the full Nitkin report so everyone can see his full response?
They published the full complaint and will be publishing her version — doesn’t Nitkin’s report deserve the same coverage?

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

What a week; an ad in local papers, the release of the Integrity Commissioners report, a response from the Mayor and even articles from the ever friendly Banner about Mayor Morris and her leadership and influence with provincial staff. The spin continues.

The agenda for the next General Committee meeting on Sept 8 finally contains the full report from the Integrity Commissioner — as well as a well spun response from Mayor Morris.

Please take the opportunity to read both and form your own opinions. They can be found on the Town website here.

You will need to scroll down to the last 2 agenda items 22 & 23 to see the full text.

The Commissioner sets up his decision with 4 points:

1. The commissioner will not conduct an inquiry if the matter is frivolous, vexatious, not made in good faith or insufficient grounds.
2. In addition to the above, the commissioner may dismiss a complaint if it is seen as an abuse of power
3. The complaint was ill-formed, incomplete and inappropriate
4. The Commissioner gave the proponents the opportunity to provide additional information respecting the complaint, which they chose not to do.

The Commissioner therefore resolved that based on the above, no inquiry should take place. He further indicated the complaint was ill-formed, incomplete and inappropriate.

He also covered the issues of privacy and confidentiality — advising against the direction taken by Council. Lastly he was very clear about following “Due Process in Law” — something he may have some knowledge since EthicsScan wrote the Resource Guide for Municipality Integrity Officers for the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO is a non-profit organization representing almost all of Ontario’s 444 municipal governments and provides a variety of services and products to members and non-members. Aurora is a member.)

However, providing an altogether different perspective is the response from Mayor Phyllis Morris.

Mayor Morris claims that “The Former Integrity Commissioner did NOT in any way rule on the merits of the complaint.” Of course she is right.

What the Integrity Commissioner did was throw the complaint out based on lack of merit — as stated clearly in his response.

Mayor Morris goes on to state “her belief” that the complaint was well formed, complete and appropriate.

One must wonder what her basis for this belief is based on — versus Mr Nitkin’s years of experience.

Possibly the much vaunted HR experience gives her this expertise. Or perhaps her work as a Paralegal. None of these qualify her as having any knowledge about the subject of integrity — and it continues to show.

The other question that should be answered is why does the Mayor get to publish her own report on the situation? Shouldn’t there be an official Council Report duly moved and agreed by the majority of Council after discussion — or is this another example of Mayor Morris knowing that she has 5 votes in her pocket so there is no need to follow process?

Lastly, why is this coming before General Committee instead of Council directly? Isn’t that the stated process — and we all know that Mayor Morris is a stickler for process. Isn’t that why they fired the Integrity Commissioner, for not following the process?

Consider attending the meeting on Tuesday. It will be worth the price of admission.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

EDITORIAL: Aug 13, 2009 04:30 AM
TheStar.com

Aurora losing its aura?

Aurora rarely gets a second glance, but the bizarre behaviour of town council in recent days merits a double take. A war of words on the web and a bruising battle at city council has culminated with the outlandish firing of Aurora’s integrity commissioner.

The surprise sacking of David Nitkin by city council – he served as ethics watchdog for barely two months – came just one day after he submitted his first formal report. Nitkin had dared to defy council by rejecting a bitter complaint against its most outspoken member, dismissing it as a politically motivated affair.

The target of council’s wrath was maverick councillor Evelyn Buck, 80, who has embraced blogging with a blunt style that gets under the skin of her rivals. A 40-year veteran of politics, her passionate web posts are the talk of the town – one reason why council wants to rein her in.

But when the watchdog refused to muzzle the maverick, he found himself in the doghouse. Aurora council is making a mockery of the integrity process and providing more grist for the blogosphere.

Writing in her blog yesterday, the irrepressible Buck neatly summed up council’s public relations blunder: “All they did was prod me with a pointy stick and create another unholy mess for themselves.”

Aurora’s aura of good governance is on the wane.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.