Accusations fly as two Rideau Lakes councillors docked pay following latest integrity probes

The council of Rideau Lakes Township is going to wait another week before releasing its latest Integrity Commissioner’s report to the public.

Township councillors voted at their Oct. 7 meeting to support a motion to release the report that looked into allegations that Councillor Linda Carr may have violated the Code of Conduct rules. Details of the Carr report have already been revealed in a closed session of council.

The Carr report will be made public at an Oct. 14 meeting of the township’s Municipal Services Committee, where it is scheduled to be discussed by committee members starting at 10 a.m.

But there are still bitter feelings over the need for this and other integrity investigations that have swirled around the Township council in recent months.

Coun. Paula Banks, whose own conduct was called into question, chastised the Ontario Ombudsman and Ontario’s Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for not putting in stronger safeguards to protect elected officials from using the Integrity Commissioner as a “political weapon” against them.

“When a system does not allow you to know your accuser, the witness against you, the evidence against you, and they ask the Township to assign one person as judge, jury and executioner, it is wrong,” she read in a statement at the Oct. 7 meeting.

Municipalities are required to have an Integrity Commissioner on standby to investigate complaints about the conduct of elected officials. The Code of Conduct requires them to maintain a high standard of ethical behaviour, conduct themselves with decorum at public meetings, and to treat members of the public, one another, and staff appropriately and without abuse, bullying or intimidation.

Banks also took aim at strongly worded letters sent to the Township from both Ontario’s Ombudsman and the Housing Ministry that called for the swift release of the report into Carr’s conduct, which was completed over a month ago.

“It is frustrating to get these letters attempting to shame our actions from the Ombudsman and Municipal Affairs with no offers to listen to valid concerns.”

Council initially voted to delay the Carr report’s public release while it explored options for an unbiased review of the report and recommendations.

In a letter sent to council Oct. 4, the ministry reminded the Township that “a municipality must ensure that all reports by the local integrity commissioner are made available to the public. While the Municipal Act does not specify a timeline with respect to release, ensuring accountability and transparency is one of council’s roles and is a priority in maintaining public trust.”

The Township CAO told council that while provincial law requires such reports to be made public, the province has no legislative power to force compliance. “They don’t have any teeth or a stick, but they are reaffirming that the provincial government expects municipal governments to function and operate in that manner.”

Banks continued to hammer home the theme that local councillors can be victimized by having their conduct repeatedly called into question.

“These investigations, I have learned, can be used as political weapons against council members by the public, fellow council members and even disgruntled families in one case I read.”

Banks claims the almost year-long investigation against Carr was “politically motivated,” but she did not provide specifics because the report is still an in-camera matter.

Councillors heard that seeking a judicial review of the Carr report, one option that council could’ve taken before it is made public, could cost anywhere from $20,000 to $30,000.

“I wouldn’t want to burden the taxpayer with that,” said Mayor Arie Hoogenboom.

He says council can still decide whether to accept the report’s findings, or impose any penalties against Carr that may flow from the recommendations.

On the same agenda, two other Integrity Commissioner reports were made public following separate investigations against council members.

One report found Councillor Paula Banks breached the Code of Conduct rules for using “extreme language” in an open council session to describe the Rideau Lakes Grassroots Group (RLGG) as it tried to appear as a public delegation last spring.

The Integrity Commissioner recommended that Banks, who was found to have broken the Code following a separate investigation earlier this year, be docked 16 days’ pay.

However, Banks defended her actions and urged council to waive the recommended penalty.

“I was only found guilty of using harsh language and referring to alleged personal threats.”

She says her actions and the threats against her were the result of an ongoing battle with the RLGG and its alleged attempts to divide council, including the distribution of a community flyer that she claims attacked the reputations of several councillors over how they’re spending tax dollars.

Despite Banks’ plea, council voted 4-3 to dock her pay for 16 days.

Another report found Councillor Marcia Maxwell breached the Code for helping to distribute a community flyer from the RLGG group and that she “engaged in conduct that would bring the Municipality or Council into disrepute or compromise the integrity of the Municipality or council.”

The commissioner recommended that Maxwell’s punishment should be to lose eight days’ pay.

Maxwell told council that she accepts the penalty.

“My actions were directly the result of my desire to support and assist my constituents.”

But council felt the punishment wasn’t harsh enough in the Maxwell case.

Following a lengthy debate with several accusations and finger pointing across the council table, councillors voted to increase Maxwell’s pay suspension to 21 days for her conduct breach in the latest integrity report, plus another 21 days from a previous investigation.

Mayor Hoogenboom voiced dismay over the process that allows for an integrity probe, but leaves it up to council to determine whether one of its members should ultimately be punished. “To me that’s a flaw in the legislation.”

He says he will follow the Integrity Commissioner’s recommendations, but is alarmed over the number of complaints and investigations that have surfaced in recent months.

“I am deeply disappointed with the number of Integrity Commissioner investigations that have occurred during this term of council, and there may be more.”

Integrity Commissioner William Hunter, who conducted the recent investigations and joined the debate virtually, was also drawn into the fray as some councillors complained about the way certain investigations were handled and that the Banks’ report contained errors.

Council had earlier voted to terminate Hunter’s contract as the Township’s on-call Integrity Commissioner with 90 days’ notice.

But even with three months left on his contract, Hunter appears relieved to be going, telling council: “I will not be accepting offers to be Integrity Commissioner for this council. Ever.”