Unredacted complaint report obtained by the News

By Collin Gallant on July 6, 2024.

@@CollinGallant

The unredacted version of a report into a city council code of conduct complaint paints a dysfunctional working relationship among council members and reveals now-public details of the issues as well as some obvious or unimportant points that were blacked out.

That includes the names of two council members named in the complaint – Mayor Linnsie Clark and Coun. Shila Sharps – as well as sections of content about another central figure in the controversy, city manager Ann Mitchell.

All sides downplayed the controversy when contacted for comment Friday.

Almost all mentions of employment positions are subject to Freedom of Information and Personal Privacy (FOIPP) according to city administrators (the city’s policy is not to comment on human resource issues).

They, along with important points of the council members in the disagreement and background, were also determined private by the City of Medicine Hat when it released the report in late March.

That month seven other members of council voted that Clark had contravened council’s code of conduct during an August 2023 exchange with Mitchell.

Clark had her duties limited, future interactions with the city manager monitored and her pay cut in half as penalties. Clark has called the finding misguided and the sanctions unreasonable, and vowed to apply for a judicial review, which will proceed on Aug. 13 in Calgary.

Copies were obtained for the News at the Calgary court.

It conforms to rules of court, according to a statement from city administrators on Friday, while the March release conforms to the municipality’s “legal responsibilities” under FOIP regulations.

“Given the current court proceedings, further comment will not be made at this time,” the statement concludes. “Our primary focus remains on the provision of municipal service delivery to the community.”

Clark stated that she provided the report as evidence and is awaiting the hearing.

“Debate and diversity of perspectives and opinions are critical aspects of any successful democracy,” she wrote in a statement. “I have every faith that Council will continue to work together on moving our strategic plan forward for the betterment of the community. That is certainly what I plan to do.”

That matter will be heard in August, though evidence and positions were filed at the Calgary court centre last month by the law firm Bennet Jones.

Sharps told the News in a statement that she doesn’t see the legal action as a burden on council, but rather a disagreement that isn’t holding back council making progress.

“Council’s focus at this time is ensuring that the business of council proceeds and serving the best interests of the municipality,” she wrote in a message to the News.

She also said that if Clark’s point is to give council greater authority in the Municipal Government Act, then it’s an issue for the provincial government to deal with, not council.

Hatters have been left to put together a picture of the controversy from the redacted city report, some documents made public by Clark and otherwise rumours.

The full report

New versions reveal the scope of the investigation would include the primary point about alleged staff mistreatment over handling of corporate changes – changing department personnel and some layoffs – but also secondary issues.

Clark told the report author she was “very concerned (about the process) … especially after it got announced publicly, before we even had a chance to make a decision,” his summary reads. She feared the idea council would be seen as “rubber stamping” layoffs that she felt were procedurally out of order.

Council was “mortified and embarrassed” – according to a now revealed section of Sharp’s interview with the investigator – when Clark stated she had obtained an outside legal opinion about the procedural issue.

Her complaint states she felt the mayor “intended” to “mislead the public … (and) created a false narrative that our city manager had intentionally made erroneous decisions that cost taxpayers dollars.”

“There were plenty of times to raise this issue with council,” she told investigators. “The city solicitor is always in the room with us. Why didn’t the mayor ask the city solicitor to weigh in if she was concerned that proper process wasn’t being followed?”

Clark’s own filings show she felt her concerns were not being heard over several meetings with Mitchell, and she questioned whether Mitchell was acting on advice from the city’s legal department.

Emails from city solicitor Ben Bullock on the subject, also in evidence, suggest an opinion wasn’t requested.

“I felt I had exhausted my avenues of getting council to do the right thing,” she told investigator Michael Solowyn, of the law Edmonton firm, Kingsgate Legal, which was hired as outside investigator.

“I was not trying to humiliate her (in) trying to make sure she understood what the rules were.”

Mitchell told council in August 2023 that she relied on past practice of other reorganizations and downsizing.

That included moving staff hired to serve under mayor and council and the city clerk’s department under the city manager, as well as the elimination of some strategy analysts among others.

Changes were enacted in the month before council was asked to pass a resolution, while Clark argues in court filings that council should have officially endorsed the move first.

Eight other members of council have said they were well apprised of the changes ahead of time, even viewing a video presentation outlining them months earlier.

The newly public sections also describe interactions during recess at the Aug. 23 meeting and the days afterward, interactions between council members and attempts at resolution.

Clark’s supporters and city hall critics were quick to jump on city administrators for leaving so much of the report blacked out before its release.

That came as FOIP policy and procedures were under sharp view already stemming from a glut of requests related to the city’s energy business and high prices last summer.

Also deleted were references to scheduling interviews, when Clark and Sharps would be away on Christmas vacation, as well as less mundane details and strongly worded portions of interviews with both women.

36
-35

Comments are closed.