Woodstock Integrity Commissioner Addresses Poetter's Appointment to City Council

The Woodstock Integrity Commissioner has received several complaints regarding Todd Poetter's recent appointment to City Council.

WOODSTOCK - Several people filed complaints to the integrity commissioner following Woodstock City Council's decision to appoint Todd Poetter to the vacant council seat. 

Poetter was given the seat, following the tragic passing of Ron Fraser. The decision by council to appoint him is explained in this article from Heart FM on May 6th. 

Woodstock resident and local business owner Wes Mazur was one of the people who filed a complaint. Mazur has lived in the Friendly City for almost 10 years now with his family and says this is the first time he has ever filed a complaint like this.

"I was sort of caught of guard and taken aback, with the passing of Ron Fraser, who I understand was an excellent councillor and had a long lasting legacy in this community. My natural inclination was we were going to have a by-election in Woodstock. Instead of following the City's own by-law procedures, council elected to make this appointment in a closed session." 

Councillor Talbot brought forward the motion to appoint Todd Poetter, who previously served on council, however he did not run in the previous election. Mazur says that while the City didn't break any laws, the decision still doesn't sit well with him and many others. 

"Just because you can, doesn't mean that you should, those established by-laws were set there to deal with such a mechanism, in the unlikely event that there is a vacant seat on council or the Mayors position, they had 3 options under the by-law." 

Council was presented three options; to appoint the runner up in Kate Leatherbarrow, invite the public to submit applications and then select the best applicant for the job or to hold a by-election.

They did not go with any of those suggestions, instead appointing former councillor Todd Poetter. Mazur says what is the point of having those by-laws.   

"It just really does not seem like this was the normal course of action, the normal course of action would have been for council to follow their own by-laws." 

You can read the entire findings from the integrity commissioner Gregory Stewart below: 

I have received communication from a number of individuals, including you, expressing their dissatisfaction with manner in which City Council conducted the process for filling a recent vacancy on council that resulted from the death of a member of council. The communications were generally similar or identical in that they all raised a concern about the fact that Council had not appointed the runner up from the most recent municipal election and had appointed a previous member of council who had not run in that election. I am responding to each of you individually although the message being sent to each of you is an identical message.

This has been a difficult situation to review as a result of the nature of the complaints. The issues raised here basically deal with concerns expressed as to the manner in which members of council have dealt with a decision on an issue before them and with a question of whether council has properly followed their procedural requirements. Generally, these are issues that do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Integrity Commissioner. Parties dissatisfied with council’s decision or with the manner in which council discharge their duty may resort to the courts for judicial review of the decision if they feel there is a sound basis for doing so.

Regardless of this, in an effort to assist the various parties in accessing and evaluating the situation, I will provide some comments regarding the procedure followed. I caution that these comments are provided out of consideration for the concerns expressed and are not to be taken as the result of an investigation and report by the Integrity Commissioner as these matters generally do not fall under my jurisdiction.

In reviewing this matter, the facts and events are clear and are stated in the various communications. As a result, I do not find it necessary to conduct any in depth factual investigation to determine the factual basis. The issue, as stated by the various complaints is clear – Did council or members of council conduct themselves inappropriately in making the recent appointment to fill a vacant council position? The obligations for a municipal council in filling a council vacancy are set out in the Municipal Act:

Section 263(1) – If a vacancy occurs in the office of a member of council, the municipality shall, subject to this section. 
(a) Fill the vacancy by appointing a person who has consented to accept the office if appointed; or
(b) Require a by-election to be held to fill the vacancy in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. 

City council has in place a Procedural By-law that sets out the various procedures to be followed by council in conducting its business. Among these procedures, Articles 11 outlines the procedures for filling a vacant council seat. Within that procedure are three steps:

Step 1 – The vacant position will be offered to the candidate that finished in the runner-up position in the last regular Municipal Election for the position. That individual must have received more than fifty percent (50%) of the number of votes as received by the next person ahead of him or her. 

If there is not an individual who can qualify under Step 1, then

Step 2 - The Clerk will place an advertisement asking individuals to apply in writing to fill the vacant council seat within fourteen (14) calendar days.

Step 3 – If Step 2 fails to draw any applicants, council will inform the Clerk that a by-election will be required to fill the vacancy.

Under the provisions of the Procedural By-law, discussions concerning the selection of a replacement for a vacant position are to be conducted in a closed session of council. Pursuant to Section 16.10.1 of the Procedural By-law, any one or more of the rules and orders under the By-law may be temporarily suspended by a vote of two-thirds of the whole council. In this particular instance, as I understand the facts, the council by a vote of at least two-thirds decided to suspend the rules in the Procedural By-law with respect to filing a vacancy on council. They made this decision in compliance with their authority under the By-law. They decided instead to appoint a person who consented to accept the office. In doing this, the council was in compliance with the requirements under the Municipal Act.

The question of whether members of the public agree with the procedure chosen by council, or like the result, is not a question for me to determine. Regardless of how some may feel about it, when council made this appointment to fill the vacancy, they did so in compliance of the requirements under the Municipal Act and within their authority and obligations under the Procedural By-law.

Yours very truly,
Gregory F. Stewart
Integrity Commissioner for the
City of Woodstock
c.c. A. Humphries, City Clerk