Ombudsman’s firing will be investigated

Allegations of an improper closed-door meeting leading up to city council’s decision to fire the ombudsman will be investigated, after all.

Local Authority Services, the city’s new closed-door meeting investigator, confirmed Monday it will be looking at complaints that some councillors met illegally before they voted Feb. 12 to fire Ontario Ombudsman André Marin.

“We’ll be investigating six complaints that meetings may have taken place, and we’ll be investigating that in the very near future,” said Nigel Bellchamber, one of the principals of Amberly Gavel.

“Those are alleged meetings, as opposed to specific meetings. That’s what we’ll be investigating – whether or not a meeting or meetings took place.”

Amberley Gavel is contracted by LAS to do municipal closed-door meeting investigations. In a surprise move, city councillors picked LAS to replace the ombudsman, acting on a notice of motion from Ward 3 Coun. Claude Berthiaume. Only Mayor Marianne Matichuk voted against firing Marin, although Ward 1 Coun. Joe Cimino, Ward 8 Coun. Fabio Belli and Ward 9 Coun. Doug Craig changed their votes when the decision was confirmed Feb. 26.

The speed with which the motion passed raised suspicions among some in the public that there was a meeting beforehand. Berthiaume has said he discussed his motion with councillors one-on-one, but denied allegations of any illegal closed-door meetings.

On Monday, Berthiaume said he was relieved Amberly Gavel was investigating.

“That’s good — it’s going to clear the air,” he said. “I think there’s been a lot of rumours (and) I think this can deal with all the complaints out there.
“It’s good that the public knows exactly what happened.”

He hopes this will close the chapter on the controversial decision to fire Marin, which led to a public outcry. The Greater Sudbury Taxpayer Association collected more than 8,000 postcards from the public calling on council to reverse its decision.

While people can disagree with the decision, Berthiaume said allegations of impropriety need to be laid to rest.

“It’s been going on long enough,” he said. “It sounds like the never-ending story.”

After council’s decision in February, Marin received dozens of complaints alleging councillors must have met beforehand. He refused to investigate those complaints, however, even after council sent him a letter formally requesting he change his mind.

“When Sudbury council opted out of the oversight services of the Ontario Ombudsman, it ousted any jurisdiction we have over any secret meetings complaints as of the date of the passing of the resolution,” Laura Pettigrew, senior counsel in Marin’s office, wrote in response to the request.

“As of Feb. 26, 2013, we can no longer investigate or act on any complaints regarding closed-door meetings, regardless of when they were received or the timing of the meeting complained about.”

Matichuk said Monday she's relieved the investigation is going ahead, but would reserve judgement about LAS until she sees the result of the investigation.

"I can't say at this point, because I have no experience with them," she said. "But I'm glad someone is doing the investigation."

Matichuk said 51 complaints had been received regarding the decision to fire Marin. She first heard LAS was doing the investigation in an email over the weekend.

"I was surprised because (City Clerk Caroline Hallsworth) had said they couldn't do it," she said. "I'm not sure what changed."

City councillors were told LAS couldn’t investigate allegations received before they were appointed, so it appeared that the matter would die there. When contacted Monday, Hallsworth said questions regarding why LAS can do the investigation after all should be directed to the firm.

“We received a request for documents today, and of course, we’re co-operating fully, as we always do,” Hallsworth said.

Bellchamber said six complaints were received after LAS was appointed and those are the ones that will be investigated. They allege there were improper closed-door meetings held prior to the Feb. 12 meeting.

“Our jurisdiction is relative to the date we’re appointed,” he said. “Once we’re appointed, then we can investigate a meeting that took place before or after our appointment.

“The allegations we’re investigating were made after the day of our appointment.”

Bellchamber said he and the review officer were to meet as early as Monday to put together an investigation plan. While no formal decision has been made, he said “I suspect there will be a formal investigation.”

Bellchamber and former Sudbury City Solicitor Fred Dean are the principals at Amberley Gavel. Since he has connections with Sudbury, Dean won’t be take part in the investigation, Bellchamber said.

“Fred is not involved in this file.”