By Sara Ross, Orillia Packet & Times

Orillia CAO Roman Martiuk, 56, sat down with media representatives Monday morning to answer questions regarding his resignation.

Martiuk resigned Friday evening after a closed session council meeting.

Below is an edited version of the interview. All of Martiuk’s responses are in full, but not all questions and answers are listed.

Q: You said in your letter (to city staff), you can’t speak to the reason you resigned, but that it had to do with professional ethics. Can you expand on that at all?

A: Sure. In the public service we have a lot of responsibilities. A lot of trust placed in us.

We look after public funds and so there are very high ethical standards that we all aspire to. When you encounter a situation that doesn’t meet with your ethical standards you can look to work to change it. If you can’t change it, you can accept the lower standard, or you can leave an organization if it’s really serious enough that you think it’s something that you cannot live with.

Certainly, I decided that I needed to resign. So, I can’t get into the detail in terms of the advice I provided to city council. That was in confidence and I have an obligation to protect that. But certainly in my view, I have to be responsible for my own integrity. I needed to tender my resignation. So I did that.

Q: Was this something that you could not change in the foreseeable future and that’s why you had to decided to resign? Whatever this situation was.

A: Well, certainly. I provide advice on a routine basis and that advice is sometimes accepted, sometimes not accepted. When it goes to ethics it’s something you have to make a choice.

And so, these are not new issues that are raised with council, but certainly at some point you have to determine whether you can stay in an organization, or not and I made the decision that I believed that I needed to resign. And that may have a positive outcome that those in control will take the view that ‘Hey this is really serious.’ And I believe it’s serious and so serious that I was prepared to put my career on the line.

Q: And the ethics commissioner now is looking into this?

A: I don’t know that to be a fact. I read in the newspaper at least one member of council is suggesting to bring in the ethics commissioner. Certainly, that’s the councillor’s prerogative. (It’s) not appropriate for staff to either advocate, or not. Certainly, I’m happy to co-operate with the ethics commissioner and they can certainly render their own opinion for city council.

Q: How tough of a decision was this for you to make?

A: Well, in some respects it’s extremely difficult because I really enjoy working in Orillia and I’d hoped to work at least a couple more years before I retired.

And other financial finalities of course, because I won’t receive the pension that I otherwise would have, but ethics does not come without cost. So certainly I felt so strongly that I needed to take action.

Q: When you use that kind of language, it almost seems like somebody is doing something unethical. Is that too strong? Is it too strong to say there is something unethical going on?

A: Well, certainly everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I certainly have strong opinions and two people can look at the same set of facts and two people can make difference judgements on what’s ethical and not.

I’ve had a career where I have a very long municipal career. I have worked on projects to create them, I’ve done the forensic audits after projects have gone bad. And so, I know what due diligence steps are appropriate. And in my view I’ve learnt through the school of hard knocks that you need to work hard to protect taxpayers. I would suggest I have a very low tolerance in this area, very high ethical standards. I expect those standards to be met. And certainly, for the most part, we have met those standards and we do them every day. Every municipality across Ontario does that every day.

Q: This council has digested two CAO’s in the course of its lifetime. Is there a problem with the council setting their standards too high, or demands too high as far as CAO’s are concerned?

A: I don’t think that’s really a fair question in that the circumstances are completely different. The only comment I would make is: it is disruptive for an organization to change CAO’s too frequently, but I don’t think there’s co-relation between the two CAO’s.

Q: How disruptive is your departure going to be as far as the city operations are concerned?

A: Well, certainly I think we’ve built an extremely strong team. I get along really well with the staff team. I think they are producing extremely positive results. Certainly, no one is indispensable in an organization. I think that they will carry on just fine. I think in part we gel very well and we’ll see whether the next CAO gels in the same fashion and is able to bring the team together.

Q: You mentioned the phrase due diligence… The one project that comes to mind for everyone around here when you use that phrase is the recreation file. Can you comment on whether that was the focus of this issue, or was that the issue here?

A: I’m not prepared to comment on any of the details of the meeting on Friday. Certainly, I’m sure that in due course there will be lots of members of council who will weigh into this issue, but it’s not appropriate for me to get into that issue.

I have a relationship with council. I provide my advice in private. I provide my resignation in private. They have all the information and it’s really in their hands.

Q: Why did you decide to retire? I guess that’s why you’re not getting the severance package?

A: Well, when you quit there is no severance. Severance is really when you’re fired. Certainly, the rumour mill is that this that is a firing. The reason I wanted to clarify that — I want to be very clear — is I decided that it was appropriate for me to go at this time. It wasn’t a question of council forcing me out of the organization.

Q: You said in your letter, you believe (council) would have preferred if you stayed?

A: I believe that to be the case.

Q: You’ve obviously set a very high ethical standard for yourself. Not to smirch council’s reputation, are they following your example as far as maintaining a high standard like that?

A: I will leave that to others to judge.

Q: Who is going to take your place temporarily?

A: We have a management structure where there is a formal deputy CAO. And so Gayle Jackson is the automatic fill-in whenever I’m on vacation or absent. She has many of the same powers as I do even on a day-to-day basis. She would be, de facto, the CAO until council makes a determination how they would proceed to fill it either now, or wait until after the election. There are a number of options that council would have.

Q: How would your resignation impact Wednesday’s meeting that’s coming up regarding the recreation centre. Will you be there offering advice?

A: Yes, I’ll be there offering advice. I’m still an employee. I still have many opinions and I’m happy to share them with city council. I would expect to be called upon to provide advice. As it turns out, many of our senior managers had booked vacations, or are out of the country because this is normally an off-week. We’ll have a very sparse table and so if I wasn’t there it would be very difficult to conduct that meeting. I’m certainly going to be there. As I mentioned in my letter to staff, there is no animosity with council. I’m perfectly happy to be there. Some of us will agree (or) disagree and that’s fine. And I’ll provide the advice as I see it. I’ve always, through my tenure, been a straight shooter. When I have an opinion council hears it and I don’t play politics. And so I’ll certainly continue that until I retire.

Q: Several councillor’s have implied that this meeting initially was called as a personnel meeting to deal with a personnel matter, but when they got to the meeting they were presented with a report that was exactly nothing to do with personnel. Is there any credence to some of those arguments.

A: Well, the matter was a personnel matter. There are factors, or facts, that are not directly personnel. For example, some of the ethical issues are not directly personnel, but they’re connected. In the context, the meeting was really called to talk about my resignation. And I explained the reasons for my resignation. Some of those reasons wouldn’t be per se, personnel matters. If you could isolate those and just talk about those without the context, but the key reason for the meeting was the fact to talk about my resignation.

Q: Why was (Mayor) Angelo (Orsi) the only one who knew what was in the report before going into the meeting?

A: I had approached the mayor a number of days before about my intention to resign. And so, I had discussed with him some of the background and had discussed with him what I intended to report to council, so he had some knowledge, absolutely. And that goes with the territory. Mayors do, by de facto, by the job, have more contact with the CAO. Have more contact with the information. And so, I asked him to call the special meeting and we proceeded from there.

Q: Any thoughts on if the city is going to go forward with the advice that you gave them, whether they liked it or not?

A: I certainly hope so. And if my resignation has that impact, I think it will have served its purpose.

Q: Were you fairly close to retirement as it was?

A: I was planning for another couple of years. I had not maxed out my pension, so I could have gainfully worked a couple more years at least.

Q: You still felt based on the situation, it was a better decision to resign.

A: Correct. Sometimes you have to put your integrity first.

Q: When did you start thinking about resigning?

A: Oh, I have been troubled for a number of months.

Q: What was the mayor’s reaction when you dropped this bombshell on him, so to speak.

A: He is very supportive of me and he was extremely disappointed. He was advocating strongly against my course of action, but we have had a number of heart to heart talks through the end and I finally came to the conclusion that I needed to take this step.

Q: Is this something you tried to resolve prior to your decision? Did you attempt to resolve it in a way that you wouldn’t have had to resign.

A: Yup.

Q: But, it just wasn’t going to happen?

A: I’ll just leave it at that. Yes.

Q: Is there anything you want to add?

A: No, I think that’s probably too much. I guess, what I would say is… Orillia is a great community. My wife and I are really looking forward to being retired here. We certainly will continue to watch how the city develops with a lot of interest. We have made a lot of friends in the community and so certainly looking forward to spending the summer on the deck and taking in all the festival events and walking the downtown and all the things that we do here in Orillia.

Q: What impact do you feel this is going to have as far as morale of the city staff is concerned. You’ve brought in so many positive changes, as far as the city’s concerned, what kind of impact do you think that’s going to have on the staff.

A: Not to be conceited, I think any change creates some angst in the organization. I believe for the most part those employees who know me, respect me and like me. And so I think there will be a bit of a negative to that. But certainly, time will tell.

Q: Do you foresee it being difficult for council to go out and get a new CAO under the cloud of this CAO having to resign because of an ethical situation?

A: Every CAO who applies for a job does their homework. Certainly, any notoriety does impact your ability to attract candidates.

CTV News report

CAO’s resignation tied to recreation file: Fogarty 

By Sara Ross, Orillia Packet & Times
Sunday, February 23 2014
Orillia’s recreation file and the resignation of city CAO Roman Martiuk are linked, says Coun. Michael Fogarty.

“I can confirm that the outcome of the personnel meeting (Friday) night, which was Roman’s resignation, is linked to my concern over the recreation file,” the Ward 3 councillor said on the weekend.

Friday evening, city politicians and some city staff members met for a special closed-session council meeting to discuss a “personnel matter.”

The personnel matter was the resignation of Martiuk, Coun. Patrick Kehoe confirmed.

The substance of the meeting, Kehoe added, had “little to do” with a personnel issue.

He would not confirm the other topic was the recreation file.

The personnel issues and the other topic should have been dealt with separately, he said, adding the other topic should not have been discussed in closed session.

“It was framed as a personnel issue, obviously because the personnel issue was somehow inextricably tied to the issue,” Kehoe said.

Asked for details, Kehoe said, “I can’t say a lot about it.”

“If someone takes a position — this personnel issue might be triggered should we decide to move in one direction or another — that in and of itself becomes inappropriate,” he said.

Asked if Martiuk gave city politicians an ultimatum, Kehoe said, “I can suggest as much.”

“One could call it an ultimatum. One could say, ‘Here are the circumstances, here are my concerns, here is my resignation. That could be it, too.”

Coun. Andrew Hill did not call it an ultimatum.
“I don’t feel like it was an ultimatum. There are definitely concerns that this council is trying to address, but other than that, I don’t want to comment too much,” he said.

Following Friday’s meeting, Fogarty drafted a letter to the city’s integrity commissioner, Suzanne Craig, about the actions of council surrounding recreation and the 174 West St. S. option, he said.

“I’m uncomfortable, so I want our integrity commissioner to look at the whole process and say whether members are in conflict, whether council has erred in any way,” he said.
Orillia politicians are considering two locations for a $35-million recreation facility. They have approved an aquatic centre and double gymnasium on James Street.

Tribal Partners, a real-estate private equity and development company, will make its pitch to council Wednesday to have the $35-million recreation complex become part of its $100-million development at 174 West St. S.

Fogarty said he is becoming increasingly concerned with the growing discrepancy between recommended procurement practices and the procurement practices used on 174 West St. S.

“I would just suggest reviewing the Bellamy inquiry,” he said.
For three years, Justice Denise Bellamy probed a scandal involving the City of Toronto and MFP Financial Services that saw a $43-million city computer-leasing deal balloon to more than $80 million.

In her final report, Bellamy concluded the mayor at that time wasn’t paying attention to details and councillors were so interested in fighting and smearing one another, they were asleep at the switch.
The case included bribes, ethics breaches and conflicts of interest.
On Sept. 12, 2005, Bellamy released 244 recommendations to ensure it did not happen again, including hiring an integrity commissioner.

Fogarty said, upon review of Bellamy’s recommendations, he wants the City of Orillia’s integrity commissioner to look at the entire process.

“With a file this large and this complex, people are quite nervous about meeting in public, meeting in private, so I just want to get everything in public and on the table,” Fogarty said.

Kehoe said he would also like Craig involved.

Coun. Linda Murray, too, would like to see the information made public.

“I hope what was discussed in closed is allowed to be shared,” she said in an email response to The Packet & Times.

Murray said she is saddened by Martiuk’s decision to resign, adding she understands the reasons behind it.

“He is a man of integrity and supports the city and its staff completely,” she wrote. “Speaking only for myself, he still has my confidence and full support. We will be losing a very valuable member of our team.”

Mayor Angelo Orsi would not comment on what occurred during Friday’s meeting.

“The unfortunate part of municipal governance is sometimes there’s closed-session material that cannot be divulged for purposes of personnel, etc.,” he said.

Orsi is the one who called for Friday’s meeting.

“… Something this substantial … needed attention,” he said.

Asked what he thought of Fogarty writing to the integrity commissioner, Orsi said, “At this time, I’m not going to speak on councillors’ actions or positions,” he said.

The Packet & Times has not been able to reach Martiuk for comment.

Roman Martiuk’s letter to city staff 

Orillia’s CAO Roman Martiuk has written a letter to city staff regarding his resignation. Martiuk resigned Friday evening following a special closed-session council meeting where a “personnel matter” was discussed.

Letter to City Staff

As you have probably heard, I tendered my resignation on Friday, February 21, 2014.

My last day of work will be March 21, 2014. The purpose of this letter is to share with you my thoughts, reasons for retirement and to dispel the rumour mill.

Many of you will not be aware that I have in excess of 30 years in the workforce. I came to Orillia as my last move prior to retirement. Orillia is a great community and provides exactly what my wife and I were looking for in our retirement. We were very happy when Council asked me to become the CAO for the City of Orillia. I fully expected to retire in Orillia, the question was when.

My style as CAO is to help Councils implement change in a municipality. As a result, I typically spend two to five years in a municipality implementing change before moving on. Council was looking for change and neither Council nor myself believed I would serve for an extended period of time. In Orillia I found a very strong administration compared to other assignments. As a result, my planned change program has proceeded very quickly and is either complete or well underway. The City is well positioned with a strong management team, a new organizational structure, new budget and financial planning systems, and a continuous improvement program to name a few. From this perspective I have delivered what I set out to accomplish.

There has been much speculation with respect to the confidential Council meeting held on Friday. The meeting was private and I cannot share with you its content. As a matter of professional ethics I chose to resign at this time. This meeting was only one factor in deciding to advance my retirement.

I’d like to clarify some facts regarding my retirement:

1) Is the CAO receiving a severance?

No, as with any municipal employee who retires, I will be paid up to my last day of work. I will apply to OMERS then begin to receive my pension.

2) Did Council force the CAO to resign?

No. I believe Council would have preferred I did not resign.

3) Is Roman moving to a CAO job someplace else?

No. I plan to retire. I do not rule out the prospect of becoming bored and taking on something paid or volunteer in the future, but that is some ways off.

4) Is Roman planning to move?

No. Orillia offers a great lifestyle. I have established community connections and I’m a member of Rotary. I look forward to being an active member of the community.

5) Are there hard feelings between Council and the CAO?

No. I continue to have the utmost of respect for each and every member of Council. I believe the feeling is mutual. While I do not always agree with all members of Council, in a democracy, debate and diversity of views is healthy.

Municipal employees routinely demonstrate the highest standards of integrity and dedication to public service. I find those ideals alive and well in the City of Orillia. It has been my privilege to lead a group of very talented people over the past two years.

Thank you for your efforts and keep up the good work.

Roman