At the beginning of Monday's council meeting, local resident, Laurie Blake addressed the council with a concern. Blake understood a comment in the Ombudsman's report to suggest the closed session meeting had not been audio or video recorded.
His concern was related to a sentence in paragraph 43, “The version of events presented by council in its response to our preliminary report differs from the recollection of the individuals we interviewed, as well as from the written record of the discussion as described in the closed session minutes.”
And Blake reminded the council of an Ombudsman’s recommendation of 2015 that “The City of Elliot Lake should implement a practice of audio or video recording its closed sessions.”
When Blake finished, Mayor Andrew Wannan opened the discussion for comment or question. “I can open up the floor, if anybody has a question or comment, for that matter.”
Opening for comments or questions to a Public Input is a rare occurrence.
Councillor Charles Flintoff spoke first. “Thank you, Your Worship, I don’t know if I’m wrong here, but aren’t most of our closed sessions recorded?”
Wannan said, “All our closed sessions are recorded,” and as Wannan was speaking, Flintoff spoke over him saying, “All our closed sessions are recorded so I don’t know where you’re thinking that they’re not.” Wannan continued, “the recording was provided to the Ombudsman by the comments from our council.”
“We had an investigation. Each of us have our different views during the investigation and the video collaborated everything and it was all presented to the Ombudsman.”
Blake responded, “I’m intrigued by the Ombudsman’s comments then, that there was a disparity between what he got and what he interpreted he got.”
Wannan told Blake, “The Ombudsman did not directly interview us … we never spoke directly to an ombudsman.”
Did the investigator review a video record of the closed meeting?
The Ombudsman’s report describes the information the investigator reviewed. The description includes meeting minutes and interviews of the meeting attendees but it does not mention reviewing video or audio records.
Later in the meeting, during council's discussion of the report, Couns. Norman Mann expressed disappointment with the investigation and commented, “What they were missing in this was the context of the discussion.”
‘All closed meetings are recorded’ / ‘No recording [of emergency meeting]’
From the perspective of local ratepayers, an important closed meeting took place on Tuesday, April 25, 2023, at 7:30 a.m. The minutes of the “emergency meeting” report that all members of council were present; the meeting was conducted at City Hall in the Committee room, and it lasted about a half hour.
Subsequently, Elliot Lakers were informed, “The City of Elliot Lake has parted ways with its Chief Administrative Officer.”
On May 4, 2023, regarding the emergency meeting, the City clerk advised this writer, “There is no recording of the emergency meeting. These meetings are often held off-site or outside of regular work hours, with minimal notice. Again, as per Section 70(5)(a) this does not invalidate any business conducted at the meeting.”
‘Accepting a black eye’ for Elliot Lake?
The council was not pleased with the Ombudsman’s report.
Making the opening comments, Couns. Mann expressed disappointment that it took “thirteen months from the date of the infraction and seven months from the investigations.”
“Actually, I was hoping to talk to the investigator at AMO, but at the last minute, plans changed and their office did not attend to the magnitude that we were hoping.”
And Blake is not pleased the council accepted the report.
“After all is said and done, I find it absolutely remarkable that the investigator would make that comment, as they did.”
Speaking to ElliotLakeToday, Blake wondered why the council would accept the report with an unclear statement.
“Accepting that is like accepting a black eye on council and on Elliot Lake,” he said.
To read part 1 of this article, please click here.