‘Terrible leadership’: Gananoque councillors unleash blistering criticism of mayor during tense meeting
What began as a public discussion of an open letter by Mayor John Beddows quickly turned into an extraordinary airing of grievances Wednesday, as Gananoque councillors accused the mayor of divisive leadership, refusing to accept criticism and damaging relationships with council and municipal staff.
“You’ve got your vision and you’re not capable of moving it,” Deputy Mayor Vicki Leakey told Beddows during the lengthy and sometimes tense discussion.
“The stress is because of you,” Coun. Patrick Kirkby said.
“Never have I encountered such terrible leadership.”
Coun. Matt Harper accused Beddows of turning disagreements into fights and told him: “You’re not telling the truth so no one’s paying attention to you.”
And Coun. David Osmond reminded the mayor that council had already publicly demonstrated its lack of confidence in him through an October 2025 vote.
At Wednesday’s meeting, the mayor also overturned his own veto on a matter involving a Birch Street development.
An extraordinary exchange
The extraordinary exchange unfolded as council considered Beddows’s July 31 open letter, in which the mayor accused council of restricting his ability to perform his duties and questioned how measures imposed following an April preservation notice, including restrictions on his access to Town Hall and communications with municipal staff, were connected to the preservation of municipal records.
Beddows repeatedly argued that the matter should be discussed publicly rather than behind closed doors.
“I think the public is well served by having this discussion in public,” said the mayor.
The town, however, had already told reporters before Wednesday’s meeting that it could not publicly explain the rationale behind the measures Beddows was questioning, because they stemmed from confidential in-camera discussions.
That position remained in place when Beddows raised his open letter during Wednesday’s public meeting and argued that the matter should be discussed openly. Beddows maintained that the opportunity he had previously been given to discuss council’s decisions was offered through an in-camera process and argued that the public deserved to hear the discussion.
“The offers were for an in-camera consultation and Coun. Leakey wouldn’t reply to me in writing. So the answer is let’s put it on the record, let’s put in public, and that’s the important part of this,” said Beddows.
But rather than providing the public explanation Beddows sought, councillors used the opportunity to deliver some of their most pointed criticism yet of the mayor’s conduct and leadership.
Coun. Anne-Marie Koiner said Beddows’s letter failed to acknowledge that council had provided him with an opportunity to discuss the measures imposed following the preservation notice.
She accused the mayor of frequently dismissing council’s views and said his letter “oozes of righteousness.”
“In my opinion this letter is disrespectful to council, a detriment to this community and flies in the face of democracy and integrity,” said Koiner.
When Beddows asked whether he could respond to Koiner’s comments, she declined.
“It’s your opinion that will be speaking,” she said. “It has nothing to counter mine, and this is exactly the problem – this is opinions. This is what you feel, this is what I feel. I have said my stance.”
The exchange escalated when Harper challenged Beddows about his leadership and asked how many times he had been asked to step down.
Beddows said he had received four requests to resign in 2025, all within approximately 60 days of the release of an integrity commissioner’s report concerning his conduct.
“All of them are in the public record,” Beddows said, adding that the requests were either entered into council records through correspondence or raised verbally during council meetings.
Harper asked whether Beddows had spoken directly with the people who had asked him to step down.
Beddows said he had spoken with two of them, but not about the requests to resign because they had not raised the issue with him directly.
At one point, Beddows commented on what he believed was Koiner smiling or smirking after a remark.
“It’s a good smile, Coun. Koiner. Thank you. Appreciated,” Beddows said.
“Like that comment wasn’t needed, too,” Harper immediately replied.
Leakey then intervened.
“I want everyone to take a deep breath,” she said. “This is silly. I’m old, I’m a mother, I’m a grandmother, I’m an aunt and I want it to stop.”
Leakey said Beddows was strongly committed to his own vision and did not leave enough room for council members’ opinions.
“Your Worship, I know it’s tough for you, I know you don’t understand,” Leakey said. “You’ve got your vision and you’re not capable of moving it.”
Mayor overturns own veto
She pointed to an earlier dispute involving a Birch Street development as an example.
Beddows had vetoed a council-approved amendment involving an unopened road allowance on Birch Street, saying his decision was about preserving a tool he believed could help advance Ontario’s housing priorities, rather than exercising the town’s right to repurchase the property.
During Wednesday’s meeting, developer Jeff McEwen expressed his disappointment with Beddows’s veto and challenged the mayor over the decision.
Beddows initially indicated he would abstain from the subsequent vote before changing his position and voting in favour of council’s decision.
The vote effectively overturned his earlier veto.
McEwen then left the meeting.
Leakey cited the episode as an example of the difficulty she said council has experienced working with Beddows.
“This is the first time I’ve seen you in four years recognize that your decision might not have been a good move,” she said.
“There’s gotta be a better way for you and council to communicate so that we can move forward. But this is not progress.”
“You’re a smart man. I’m convinced. I’m convinced you have a better way with dealing. Please, can we get through these next couple of months and move business for the town forward. Let’s get our job done.”
‘Terrible leadership’
Kirkby, who is generally less vocal during council debates, delivered perhaps the most personal criticism of the evening.
He said he had been unable to sleep the night before the meeting and described the current term of council as “one of the most stressful things in which I’ve taken part of.”
“The stress is because of you,” Kirkby told Beddows.
“Never have I encountered such terrible leadership.”
Kirkby accused Beddows of creating unnecessary stress for council and municipal staff and said the conflict could have been avoided had the mayor apologized to staff following findings in an integrity commissioner report.
He also accused Beddows of attacking individual councillors because of how they vote on motions.
“Very childish,” Kirkby said. “I am allowed to vote however I please and should not be attacked for my opinion.”
Kirkby called on Beddows to apologize to council, town staff and Gananoque residents for what he described as the deterioration of relationships during the current term.
He also referenced the financial impact of the ongoing dispute, calling on Beddows to be accountable for what he described as adding “just shy of half a million dollars” to residents’ tax bill.
A legal-cost report presented to council Wednesday shows the town has incurred $390,194.90 in legal costs categorized under the “Integrity Commissioner Judicial Review Application.”
The report lists total legal costs of $642,464.79 across the categories identified by the town for 2023 through 2026, as posted July 28.
The judicial-review category represents the largest single category of legal spending identified in the report.
The report was requested by council in October 2025, when council directed staff to provide a breakdown of the town’s legal costs by category. Council subsequently requested that the information be presented quarterly.
Council received the legal-cost report for information Wednesday.
The Town’s report does not characterize the $390,194.90 judicial-review expense as having been caused by Beddows personally. It identifies the amount under the category “Integrity Commissioner Judicial Review Application.”
Not about a lawsuit: Beddows
Beddows rejected the suggestion that his open letter was intended to support a future lawsuit or re-election campaign.
He said his motivation was transparency and accountability.
“No, not interested in forming a future lawsuit and yes, interested in transparency,” Beddows said. “No, I don’t think the discussion should happen in closed session, it should happen in open session.”
The debate also turned directly to the restrictions on Beddows’ access to Town Hall.
Harper said he did not believe it was standard practice for a mayor to have after-hours access to Town Hall and suggested the mayor knew why the restrictions had been imposed.
“I think you know very well why this happened,” Harper said.
Harper also compared Beddows’s handling of the Town Hall issue to the Birch Street dispute, accusing the mayor of changing his position after being challenged.
Beddows said he adamantly disagreed with Harper’s characterization.
“You’re not telling the truth so no one’s paying attention to you,” Harper responded.
Coun. Colin Brown also criticized Beddows for publishing the open letter after questioning council’s conduct.
“I couldn’t imagine writing a letter questioning council then making it public,” Brown said. “That’s not how you do business.”
Osmond pointed to Beddows’s characterization of himself as a “change agent,” a description the mayor previously gave in an interview with The Recorder and Times.
Beddows had said his message was sometimes unwelcome because it was challenging and difficult.
Osmond characterized that approach as another example of the mayor deflecting responsibility.
“It’s not me, it’s them,” Osmond said.
Osmond also pointed to council’s previous formal vote of no confidence in Beddows, passed in October 2025.
“This council has already, in full view, in transparency, raised our hands and let you know and everyone else know we do not have confidence in our mayor,” Osmond said.
History with police board
He then raised Beddows’s history with the Gananoque police services board.
A Dec. 17, 2025 decision by the Inspector General of Policing found that Beddows breached sections 4 and 15(1) of the Code of Conduct for Police Service Board Members by disclosing confidential information from closed board meetings concerning the police response to a gathering of the Outlaws Motorcycle Club.
The Inspector General found that Beddows could have fulfilled both his responsibilities as mayor and his responsibilities as a police board member while maintaining the confidentiality of information obtained through the board.
No additional disciplinary measure was imposed because Beddows had already been restricted from board duties throughout the approximately one-year investigation.
During Wednesday’s meeting, Osmond criticized Beddows for not informing council about his absence from police services board meetings.
Osmond said Beddows stopped attending meetings for months and that council members did not learn about the situation until a council meeting.
“We didn’t know,” Osmond said. “We found out at a council meeting.”
Osmond added Beddows later declined an opportunity to step aside and allow another member to fill his position.
“No reason given, no transparency, no leadership,” Osmond said.
Beddows then asked Osmond whether he had been involved in the publication of a police services board letter that brought details of the investigation into the public domain.
The mayor subsequently withdrew the question and apologized for raising it.
“You’re focusing on how, not the findings of the letter but how the letter got shared,” Osmond responded.
Disagreement over minutes
The confrontation came after council also spent considerable time at the beginning of Wednesday’s meeting debating the accuracy of its previous minutes.
Beddows sought to amend the minutes of the July 15 and July 28 meetings to include part of a discussion surrounding the Birch Street matter. No councillor seconded his proposed amendment.
Beddows subsequently argued that Brown’s request to call the vote during the July 28 discussion was a formal “point of order” – a procedural objection that a council meeting is not following the rules – and that it should therefore be reflected in the minutes.
Town clerk Penny Kelly disputed that characterization.
Kelly said she recalled Brown simply asking that the vote be called, rather than formally raising a point of order.
She said similar requests had occurred on other occasions when council discussions had moved away from the subject of a motion.
“We’ve not recognized in any of our minutes when a point of order has been called,” Kelly said.
Beddows ultimately withdrew his amendment, and council approved the minutes as written.
The broader dispute over the preservation notice remains unresolved.
Kirkby said a recording of an April 8 council meeting at the heart of that dispute has been preserved and that Beddows had been verbally informed of that during the May 11 meeting with Leakey and CAO Melanie Kirkby.
Beddows subsequently told The Recorder and Times that the town’s written confirmation of the recording’s preservation was the first confirmation he had received that it had not been deleted.
The discrepancy remains a matter for further clarification.
Wednesday’s meeting, which began at 4 p.m., also included a scheduled closed session dealing with confidential municipal matters. Council entered closed session at approximately 9 p.m., roughly five hours after the meeting began.
Beddows responds
Following the meeting, Beddows spoke with local media for approximately 45 minutes about the criticism directed at him.
“My relationship with council is what it is,” said the mayor.
Asked about the criticism from councillors, Beddows said he believes the conflict is largely the result of personality differences.
“It comes down to, in a lot of ways, I believe it comes down to personality conflicts, and I’m going to say, I have not changed. I’ve done the things I’ve said I was gonna do.”
Beddows said he has remained available to councillors who want to repair their relationships with him.
“I’ve been available for any member of council to approach me,” he said.
Beddows said the October 2025 vote of no confidence came as a surprise to him, and he questioned how he could be expected to co-operate with council after it occurred.
“I didn’t know that was coming; it was a surprise,” Beddows said.
“How am I to work with them after that? Essentially that was a declaration by them in October 2025 that they didn’t want to work with me, so how do I go forward with cooperation after that?”
Beddows said Wednesday’s criticism did not change his decision-making about a possible re-election campaign.
“I didn’t learn anything new about council’s attitude towards me,” he said.
Asked about Koiner’s facial reaction during the meeting, which prompted Beddows to comment on her expression, he said he believed it reflected personal animosity toward him.
“I felt Coun. Koiner’s expression was one that was expressing a personal dislike,” he said. “It’s not how we’re supposed to behave.”
Couns. Harper and Kirkby left the meeting following the discussion of the town’s legal costs. That didn’t sit well with Beddows.
“They’re paid to be there,” Beddows said.
Beddows also defended the use of strong-mayor powers, saying he believes Gananoque needs to change the way it operates.
“We’re running a corporation here; we just had to borrow $12.9-million after raising taxes significantly to try to make up for lost time,” Beddows said. “The way we used to do business as a corporation wasn’t good enough.”
Asked whether the town had improved during his four-year term, Beddows said financial tools were beginning to be put in place.
Beddows maintained that restrictions on his access to Town Hall continue to impede his ability to perform his duties.
He also maintained that council had not publicly provided the information he was seeking regarding the preservation notice.
“They didn’t answer any of the four questions; they didn’t put their in-camera deliberations into the public record,” Beddows said.
The mayor added council had not publicly established that preservation of records was the reason for the measures imposed against him.
On the issue of an apology to staff following the integrity commissioner proceedings, Beddows said the ongoing judicial-review process was the reason he was not prepared to offer one.
“The assertion in the judicial review is that I haven’t done anything wrong. Full stop,” Beddows said.
Asked whether he believed staff and council deserved an apology, Beddows responded: “I didn’t say that. I said I’m not going to offer one.”
Asked why, he said: “The judicial review process is not yet completed.”
Beddows also disputed the suggestion that his open letter was intended to advance a future lawsuit or re-election campaign. The mayor has not yet publicly declared his intention regarding this fall’s election.
He said the central issue remained the lack of public explanation for council’s decisions.
“Council didn’t answer my four questions in my letter and didn’t put the contextual information into the public record,” said Beddows.
“The public has no understanding of what legal opinion may have informed their actions or the why.”
Beddows said the purpose of his letter was to have council publicly explain why restrictions had been placed on his access to Town Hall and communications with staff.
“There was no motion from council,” he said. “The whole point was for them to prove why they’re doing what they’re doing to restrict my access.”
Beddows has continued to frame his approach to municipal government as an effort to increase transparency and accountability.
Keith Dempsey is a Local Journalism Initiative reporter who works out of the Brockville Recorder and Times. The Local Journalism Initiative is funded by the Government of Canada.