Integrity commissioner to investigate alleged incident with committee member

Amherstburg Town Hall.

An alleged incident involving a town committee member and a town staff member will be the subject of an integrity commissioner investigation.

While originally expected to be an in-camera meeting item, town council voted to conduct the matter in public session Monday night. Councillor Don McArthur believed the matter should be held in the open and was the one who requested it not be in-camera.

McArthur said when he saw the matter on the in-camera agenda, he didn’t believe it did service to the town or to the principles of democracy to conduct it behind closed doors. He said it passed 4-3 to hold the matter in public and to discuss the allegations.

“I don’t think a member of the public, a member of a town committee, at a town event on town property should say to town employees that one of their co-workers is a f---ing b---h,” said McArthur. “I don’t think that’s appropriate conduct for a member of the public. I certainly don’t think it’s appropriate conduct for a member of a committee and I certainly don’t think it’s a matter that council should be discussing behind closed doors. These are the public’s chambers, it’s the public’s business and these are public servants and we represent you people.”

McArthur said the alleged comments were “hurtful, aggressive and misogynistic” and the town has an obligation to protect its staff.

“This council needs to send a strong message of deterrence and denunciation. We can’t do that if we conduct these discussions behind closed doors,” he said.

Not discussing it publicly would only fuel the rumour mill, he believed.

“I think we need to send a message to our workers, our wives, to our daughters and to our sisters that we are not going to tolerate in the workplace anymore than we’ll tolerate this sort of comment in the street,” he said.

A discussion over civil discourse and respect could be had, McArthur added, and hoped the public understood why he wanted to talk publicly on it.

There was no disclosure as to who was reportedly involved or what committee it pertains to.

Councillor Diane Pouget noted she has been an elected official for 17 years and every time council goes in-camera, she wants it to be legitimate.

“I can tell you this – in 17 years, I have never personally reacted to such a witch hunt against one person,” said Pouget. “In 17 years, I guarantee you, every time we went in-camera for personnel matters, it was legitimate. We discussed who was going to be on committees, their resumes, and if we had any trouble with anyone on committees, that was discussed in-camera. We never aired our dirty laundry in public.”

Pouget added the person in question “doesn’t even know this council is after them.” She added she voted against dealing with the matter in public, as did Councillor Molly Allaire and Councillor Peter Courtney.

“I’m absolutely appalled and ashamed that I have to sit before you tonight and listen to this witch hunt,” she said.

Deputy Mayor Chris Gibb said he voted to discuss the alleged incident in public.

The alleged incident “gives me pause” and if something were able to come of this, Gibb said he wants it known he spoke against the behaviour that was described.

“This is already a community where a past mayor had his tires slashed in his own driveway,” said Gibb. “The more we allow or accept or laugh or clap when things like this happen, the more likely it’s going to get worse. I want to go on record saying this was wrong and needs to be addressed.”

Gibb noted a recommendation from clerk Kevin Fox was to send a private letter to the individual but the deputy mayor didn’t think that went far enough.

“When staff is at an event, it’s a workplace,” he said. “There has to be decorum. If people can’t keep their emotions in check, they need to stay home.”

Courtney said while he respects transparency, he also respects private matters. He said administration came up with a resolution and no one from council actually heard the alleged interaction.

“Out of respect, I’m trying to protect all individuals. Sometimes, we don’t need to air our dirty laundry,” he said.

Courtney said there was an internal solution proposed and everyone has skeletons in their closet that could come out in the open. He said he was confident in the recommendation proposed by administration.

“It was resolved with our professional staff with recommendations and I support the recommendations in this matter,” he said.

Courtney said he wasn’t there and wanted to trust staff and their recommendation.

“Unfortunately, we’ve made a show of this,” he said.

Councillor Linden Crain made a motion to remove the person from the committee, but that motion failed. Pouget said the recommendation was to “send a letter to the person that was allegedly responsible for the wording. It was never to remove them.”

McArthur admitted people were aghast at the language he used, but that was the point. If there is passion and reason in an argument, “use that as your weapon. Not inflammatory rhetoric.” He believed the integrity commissioner should investigate, and that he didn’t want to make that decision behind closed doors.

Town council was given a memorandum from Fox. The alleged incident is said to have occurred at a town event on town property when the property was open to the public.

Fox indicated there were witness statments and a review of video surveillance, the latter which he acknowledged does not record audio but it was claimed “the agitation of the Member is apparent.”

The recommendation he put forth was “that the informal complaint process be used, and that the incident be documented, that correspondence be sent to the Member “reminding the Member of their responsibilities to conduct themselves with decorum and respect.”

Prue said he was willing to give the integrity commissioner a chance to investigate, noting while he hasn’t always agreed with advice from the integrity commissioner, the town has a new integrity commissioner that should be given a chance to look into it. He called the alleged comments “an egregious breach” and continued by stating “I can’t imagine why a member of our staff would be subjected to such a statement.”

By Ron Giofu