Wilmot Township’s council-staff policy getting another look; deferred after spirited debate

Lee Griffi, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter

Following a long and, at times, contentious discussion, the township’s Council-Staff Relations Policy is headed back to staff for another look.

The policy’s purpose is to “ensure that the relationship between council and staff is cooperative, supportive and positive with a clear understanding of the respective roles and responsibilities.“ It applies to all staff and members of council in their interactions with staff, volunteers, consultants and contractors that work on behalf of the corporation.

Coun. Kris Wilkinson explained the township currently has a staffing policy and wasn’t in favour of passing the proposed version without further vetting. He suggested waiting for a new CAO to be hired would be better timing for approving a new policy.

“I’m looking at this and thinking perhaps given what the substance of this is and what it’s suggesting, are we potentially better served by reviewing this policy when we have … a new CAO that has been hired. I think there is a lot of good in here but there are potentially pieces that need change.”

Wilkinson had several issues with the wording of the draft including what would be designated as a routine matter as opposed to a non-routine matter. He objected to the suggestion councillors are identical to members of the public and are entitled to be provided the same information at the same time.

“There was also a section that basically said we are only owed the same information as the general public. We can’t request more than a routine piece of information. Anything non-routine has to go through all of council. What’s the point of having an elected council?” he asked.

Wilkinson made the argument council should get more information.

“We have been entrusted by the public to represent them; that’s why we are here. Our job is to direct policy, administer and adjudicate tax dollars and make sure we are giving proper direction based on what our public is looking for.”

He also took exception to a portion of Section 7 of the policy which states members of “council will reach out to the appropriate director for policy prior to responding to a constituent.”

“My concern is that this clause essentially limits and tries to define what a councillor can and cannot do. Only the municipal act has that authority. As a councillor, if I want to engage with a constituent then I will.”

He added there are times when it’s appropriate to reach out to staff for policy clarification but not always.

“I don’t want any politician to be limited in their role to serve the public period.”

Acting CAO Greg Clark was taken aback by some councillors questioning the policy’s wording.

“We brought this report three weeks ago in good faith asking council to provide feedback, suggestions and recommended edits in any way shape, or form. To be brought to a council meeting where I didn’t hear a peep other than a brief conversation about a couple of points and I went through everything the mayor shared with me. It is very disheartening.”

Wilkinson immediately shot back with a point of privilege, saying the report was deferred at the last council meeting.

“Regardless of whether the points were made at that meeting or not, we’re here to debate it again so I think it’s well within our rights to make points. It’s open for debate until passed and it has not passed.”

Mayor Natasha Salonen at that point stepped in to request some restraint.

“I really don’t want to be getting into a debate with staff. The debate is to happen amongst council regarding the policy so I would ask we stick with council debating with council.”

The next elected official to express concern was Coun. Lillianne Dunstall who admitted some points were raised that made her reconsider passing the policy in its current form.

“One of the things I learned in my business life was that sometimes I make decisions and sometimes I hear things that make me change my mind, and in a lot of cases the thing that makes me change my mind ends up being a good thing.”

After listening to Wilkinson, she said a longer look at the policy is necessary.

“I’m not disparaging our staff at all, but I would like to have more clarification as well. There were things brought up … that I perhaps didn’t notice in reading, so I am in favour of deferring and having further conversation.”

A motion was passed by council to defer the report and have it come back for another look at the end of January.