UPDATED — NVCA directors balk at approving efficiency audit recommendations

But closed session vote results in departure of CAO Wayne Wilson

UPDATE – At an in-camera meeting September 5, the NVCA board appointed Gayle Wood interim CAO, effective October 6. Wood is retiring as CAO of the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority.

By Kate Harries AWARE News Network

The demonstrators outside last Friday’s meeting of the Nottawasaga Valley Board of Directors were nothing new – citizens had turned out on previous occasions, to protest the secrecy surrounding an efficiency audit that appeared to be an attack on the conservation authority’s environmentally protective role.

A report – authored by consultant Tom Gazda – from the efficiency audit committee had finally been posted on the NVCA website August 15, a week earlier, and a motion was on the agenda to approve its 26 recommendations.

Link to recommendations

Two of the recommendations were confidential and at least one of those was to be approved by the board in closed session Friday. Its meaning became clear the following Monday (August 25), when CAO Wayne Wilson vacated his job in circumstances that have yet to be explained publicly.

But none of this was hinted at in the days leading to Friday’s meeting, during which time Sandy Agnew (AWARE Oro-Medonte) had identified some problematic issues for the AWARE Simcoe board, including Gazda’s recommendations to:

-Outsource aspects of the authority’s service

-Change its primary mandate

-Implement a “solution-based” approach (which can be an euphemism for circumventing the rules, Agnew noted)

-Reduce the size of the board (smaller municipalities like Melancthon, Amaranth and Grey Highlands would share a representative rather than having their own member).

Since there was no time for a considered response and the NVCA board’s deadline for submissions had passed, AWARE Simcoe emailed the authority’s board members individually, urging that they delay voting to allow the public a chance to provide input.

The crowd, which included members of AWARE Simcoe, the Midhurst Ratepayers, the Nottawasaga Steelheaders and the Blue Mountain Watershed Trust, filed in to the Utopia Hall, and a heated meeting got underway.

First, Fred Nix of Mono Township argued against accepting the agenda because of the motion to approve the audit recommendations.

That was voted down 16-10 and the agenda was adopted. NVCA August 22 2014 – How they voted Motion 1

NVCA Chair Nina Bifolchi (Wasaga Beach) spoke in defence of the audit recommendations, for which the motion required approval in principle.

“I don’t see how this board can ignore what we have before us, fact-based recommendations and we really have to move forward with them,” she said, adding that she had a 10-page media release ready to be posted on the NVCA website later that day to explain the recommendations to the public.

Vice-chair Gail Ardiel (Blue Mountains) reiterated the statement that the recommendations are fact-based, “and we all came to the same conclusion so I don’t think you can say it isn’t the truth, so let’s move on.”

Others speaking in support of the recommendations were Walter Benotto (Shelburne), Mel Coutanche (Oro-Medonte) and Arif Khan (Barrie). CAO Wilson said senior staff welcomed strategic direction from the board.

Darren White (Melancthon) intervened on a point of privilege regarding email correspondence among board members and senior staff the previous day in which a board member expressed concerns about the efficiency audit and Bifolchi accused the board member of trying to undermine the process and acting irresponsibly.

“It is the right and in fact the obligation of a member of this board to raise questions and concerns about an issue,” White said. “Those questions should not be disregarded in such a way as to impugn the reputation of that member.”

He added: “The Township of Melancthon has no faith in the ability of the chair to operate impartially in the role of chair and as such have asked the chair to resign from her position today.”

White called for all motions relating to the efficiency audit, including the closed session matters, be tabled until the February meeting of the new board of directors which will have a new mandate following the election.

Bifolchi said the unnamed board member’s email was circulated to undermine the consultant and she had taken offence. “I will not resign,” she said.

Debate then resumed on the recommendations.

“This is the first time it’s come into the public domain, and you’re asking me to accept in principle these 26 recommendations,” said Nix. “I can’t do that.” He complained that he couldn’t even publicly discuss the first recommendation dealing with the reorganization of the NVCA, because the organizational chart underpinning it is confidential. Two of the recommendations – changing the NVCA’s mandate and membership – are beyond the power of the board because they would involve rewriting provincial legislation, he noted.

Bob Marrs (New Tecumseth), seconded by Nix, moved for deferral to allow for public input on all of the recommendations. The motion was defeated, again 16-10. NVCA August 22 2014 – How they voted Motion 2.

Brent Preston of Clearview said there are legitimate concerns with the process leading to a perception that there are “things that are snuck through” – although he did not believe that had been the intent.

However, “there are important pieces of background information which we were presented orally, which we’ve never received in writing, that I’m having trouble remembering, that underpin those recommendations,” Preston said. “The public hasn’t seen those at all so it’s hard for the public to accept point-blank that these are fact-based recommendations.”

In a perfect world, Preston said, a suggestion from Nix that each recommendation be voted on individually would make sense. “But since obviously that’s not the way we’re proceeding, I think it’s also appropriate if people want to put forward amendments to change or remove individual recommendations.”

Preston movedto remove Recommendation 2, which suggests maximizing the use of part-time and seasonal employees. “I have seen no evidence whatsoever that this will lead to greater efficiency. I haven’t seen any kind of analysis of what this would do to our overall financial position… In our township, I’ve seen lots of evidence that it’s actually counterproductive, that it costs more and that it’s very harmful for staff morale and staff retention.”

Bifolchi assured Preston that all the recommendations would be brought back to the board for further discussion.

Preston wasn’t convinced. The motion on the floor was not to take the motions back to members’ councils and seek input – it was to adopt them, he pointed out.

Bifolchi suggested amending the main motion by adding “subject to review and consultation with our solicitor and member municipalities.”

“And the public,” said someone.

Bifolchi said it’s up to individual board members to speak to the public.  “The public has had quite a lot of input into this process,” she said.  (In fact, a section of the public was ignored until AWARE Simcoe complained,)

White from Melancthon questioned the process whereby 15 of the recommendations had been prioritized for implementation in 2014, noting that the list was drawn up in haste at the end of a meeting under pressure from consultant Gazda, who told them it was “just an exercise.”

Mary Small Brett agreed. The prioritization exercise happened very quickly, she said, and there were no scientific facts behind the recommendations. “If we are going to come back and discuss each one individually before anything happens, why do we have to adopt them today? I don’t see the point.”

Bifolchi assured the board that all 15 prioritized recommendations would come back to the board before implementation.

“We’re either adopting them or we’re not,” Preston said.

Some discussion focused on the meaning of the words “in principle.” Doug Lougheed (Innisfil) helpfully Googled the word and reported that “an agreement in principle is no agreement at all.”

Questions arose about the content of the 10-page media release, that board members had not seen. “The consultant put it all together because he felt the public wanted it so badly,” Bifolchi said.

Why isn’t it in our agenda package? she was asked. Because the recommendations hadn’t been passed yet, she said. (A 13–page summary was posted today.)

Darren White suggested an amendment whereby the board receive the recommendations and submit them to their councils.

Coutanche disagreed, emphasizing the importance of taking action. “We spend $45,000 and you want to erase that,” he said. “What part of ‘move forward’ don’t you understand?”

“I don’t think any one wants to throw away this money,” White replied. “I think there are a lot of good recommendations in there, but I want to proceed with the full knowledge of my council and the residents of my township, I want to proceed in a conscious and well-thought out way, not something rammed down my throat by a bunch of people who are intent on getting this through no matter what.”

Brent Preston proposed new wording that was accepted by White.

After a break, the motion had been changed again and was put forward by Coutanche, seconded by Donna Jebb (New Tecumseth). The essence of Preston and White’s intent was preserved, with the key word “approved” replaced by “received.” It was carried unanimously. NVCA August 22 2014 – How they voted Motion 3.

What happened to cause the turnaround during the break? The speculation among members of the public was that the presence of CTV’s Roger Klein, who was video-taping the meeting, might have led to a softening of positions by the Bifolchi faction. In any case, municipalities and the public (and of course the development industry) now have time to provide input before any binding decisions are taken.

The motion to prioritize 15 of the recommendations was passed upon a reiteration from Bifolchi that every recommendation would be back before the board before any action is taken.

Then Rick Webster (Springwater), seconded by Coutanche, put forward a motion to approve an offer of service from consultant Gazda for a further $35,000 in work on performance management and market remuneration issues.

This sole source contract that almost doubles the total amount spent on the efficiency audit was a sticking point for several councillors. “The optics of it really look bad,” said Darren White, adding that these costs should have been mentioned earlier.

Webster pointed out that there is a copyrighted document in the Gazda report.

“Sometimes you’ve got to spend money to save money,” said Ralph Hough (Oro-Medonte). The motion carried.