Municipal Monitor - March/April 2008 - (Page 6)

VIEWPOINT By Andy Koopmans Much Ado About Nothing? by the provincial Ombudsman. It is this appointment process which has generated all of the current debate. It is appa r ent t hat t her e is considerable disagreement over the most appropriate course of action in appointing the required investigator. W h ile a subst a ntia l number of municipalities have elected to use the service being offered through Local Authority Services Ltd (LAS), an AMO subsidiary, or to appoint their own investigator, several others have decided, either deliberately or by default, to utilize the services of the provincial Ombudsman. Since all of these options are equally valid, it begs the question, “Why is there so much controversy?” It would appear that the debate has centred on two key concerns: • W i l l m u n i c i p a l ly- a p p o i n t e d investigators undertake their duties in an independent manner? • Is it appropriate for municipalities to charge an administrative fee for processing the investigation requests received? With respect to the first concern, since 2001 the provincial government has specifically recognized that the municipal order of government is both “responsible and accountable” and consequently can be trusted to make reasonable and prudent decisions regarding matters that fall within the municipal domain. Suggestions that municipalities would now act in a less responsible manner in the matter of appointing an independent investigator would, therefore, seem to be unfounded. If municipalities around the province were moving forward with appointing one of their own municipal employees as their investigator, I could understand the concern, but to my knowledge, no March/April 2008 A s you turn the pages of this edition of the Municipal Monitor, I a m su re t hat most, if not all, of you will stop at our article regarding the retention of Closed Meeting Investigators under the provisions of the Municipal Act. Over the past several months, unless you live under a rock or have sworn off reading newspapers, I suspect that you have seen at least one newspaper article on this very topic. Of all the new Municipal Act provisions that have come into effect, this has certainly generated the most interest and debate. As most of you know, effective January 1, 2008 an individual who wishes to do so may request that a n invest igat ion be under t a ken with respect to a municipality’s compliance with the open meeting provisions of the Municipal Act a nd /o r a ny p r o c e du r a l by-l aw requirements regarding a meeting or part of a meeting that was closed to the public. The investigation is to be conducted either by an investigator appointed by the municipality or, if no such investigator is appointed, No single approach is going to work for every municipality across the province. And there’s nothing wrong with that. 6 • municipal MONITOR

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Municipal Monitor - March/April 2008

Municipal Monitor - March/April 2008 Contents President's Message: Stress and Change Viewpoint: Much Ado About Nothing? Covering the Cost: Tapping into Safe, Sustainable Water and Sewage Services Closed Session Investigations: What Do They Mean for Your Municipality? Subtle Sabotage: Female Bullying Trends in the Workplace Water Under the Bridge Municipal Memos Index to Advertisers

Municipal Monitor - March/April 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.