Two weeks ago on our Spacing Votes blog, Karen MacKenzie wrote about the transition process faced by newly elected councillors. The article touched on the handing-over of files and information from the incumbent to the councillor-elect. In that piece Gord Perks, the new councillor for Parkdale High Park, comes across as slightly prophetic:
“If I’m lucky, I’ll have a [chance to chat with the former councillor and her assistant]. If I’m unlucky, I’ll go in and there will be nothing left but lightbulbs and paperclips.†Perks said. “I may not see a single piece of paper.â€
This weekend, the Globe and Mail reported that Perks did not receive one single file from the out-going Sylvia Watson. And when I spoke with Perks earlier today he said “It was the cleanest office I’ve ever walked into.”
Strange, isn’t it, that one of Watson’s assistants told Spacing that although there is no official process in place which would dictate the crossover, Watson is interested in “serving the community,†and would help out in any fashion. The other downtown newbie, Adam Vaughan, has received only a half-dozen slim file folders from the former office of Olivia Chow. One City Hall observer told me they watched a dolly cart with about 10 boxes with “OC” scrawled on the side be removed over the last two weeks: “There were a number of personal items in that office, but not that much stuff.”
I can only imagine how few files will have been left by outgoing councillor Peter LiPreti and his bitter rival Anthony Perruzza. Adrian Heaps, a newly elected Scarborough councillor, also showed up at City Hall to find a barren office. Ron Moeser, a former city councillor until 2003 when he lost to Gay Cowbourne, found an empty office too, though I feel a little less sorry for him since he laid waste to his office before handing it over to Cowbourne.
Am I the only one surprised that there is no policy or process in place to hand over ALL files gathered during a councillor’s term in office? I find these actions completely undemocratic because the decisions to remove these files are based solely on self-interest and not focused on the needs of constituents.
These actions are far reaching. Files do not adhere to the rigidity of council terms and remain open long after a councillor has departed. What if a development application was under consideration or a community group had come to some kind of agreement with the councillor? Other departments in the city might have documentation, but how is a councillor to know the files even exist? Having talked to Adam Vaughan on Friday last week, he was excited to get working on issues surrounding the island airport, but any information on the dispute was nowhere to be found.
I understand that outgoing councillors and their staff have put their blood, sweat and sometimes tears into their work and don’t want the incoming councillor to take all the credit. But outgoing incumbents need to realize that the paperwork they are destroying has much more importance to the city than their bruised egos.
So I’m going to issue an challenge to the new city council: if you want voters to believe that you’re acting with their best interests at heart, please enact legislation that demands all correspondence and files related to ward issues cannot be destroyed or removed from City Hall and must be passed along to the next city councillor. If my recommended rules are not to their liking, I counter-propose this: upon re-election, they must destroy all files accumulated during their previous term and start from scratch again. If that doesn’t seem fair, then they will start to understand (and possibly remember) the tremendous learning curve and challenges faced by new members of council.
17 comments
Can we really leave it up to the Council. What if the two new Councillors affected – PERKS and VAUGAHN — were to present notices of motion at the first Council meeting to formalise a policy.
What if they were also to file FOI to the archivist – presumably that’s where the boxes were headed — to get the files on the subject.
What if the Integrity Commissioner were asked to rule on making the files available to the newbies
Though each councillor gets to pick their own office staff, aren’t these people paid by the City of Toronto? (It was my impression that the councillors have a taxpayer-funded office budget, and that that budget and staff can only be used for city business, not for purely political things like election campaigning.)
If so, no matter how hard-working those staff are, don’t normal legal standards make their work the property of their ultimate employer, the city? I can’t imagine too many workplaces where fired or laid off employees get to take the only copies of their work with them when they leave, even if their immediate boss was fired/laid off at the same time and says they should.
Remember, ‘OC’ has a lot of skeletons in that Ward 20 closet.
Matt L> That’s exactly what I was thinking. In “the real world,” the moment somebody gets the can, they’re ushered out of the building. That’s kind of mean, but it prevents this sort of thing. Obviously councillor’s can’t be ushered out when they lose…but some provision should be made, as these files must technically belong to the city.
It’s like, after years of what I’m sure each non-winner would characterizes as “dedicated service” they take a big pooh on their constituents.
It’s funny, my first reaction is “vote these people out” but they have been.
So disappointing.
humorous since OC herself was the victim of a miraculously disappearing files formerly managed by a one Mr. Ianno. That left thousand of immigration files suddenly bare, and in need of being recovered from the records in Ottawa. I wonder if this is common policy, to try to screw over the other guy.
Then again I severely doubt Chow herself, or any of her former city hall staff (most of whom moved on to the federal office) were directly involved in this. They currently have better things to do then clean out an old office.
Still it’s sketchy and not cool.
This wasn’t meant to be an attack on Olivia. Cuz Sylvia Watson, a Liberal, did it too. It just seems to be a tradition or an accepted act.
The other side of this is that councillors include their own notes and thoughts that go into the files — stuff that is never used. I believe they have the right to remove information that is strictly their own or never was part of the file.
But the purging of files at City Hall seems is like burning a village before you retreat. It just seems dirty and low. And all sides of the political spectrum seem to partake.
Matt,
Agreed. Silva and Watson and their people did the wrong thing. Period.
Sorry if I sounded if I was getting super defensive of Olivia. I didn’t think you guys were attacking her, and if you were she and any other political would deserve to be attacked over hindering the actions of government like this.
If Vaughan and/or Perks (or anyone else) puts forward a motion that councillors need to brief and provide key files to their successors I would support such a motion.
This is common practice at all levels of government. I have first hand knoledge of what goes on in a provincial minister’s office during an election. Basically, they shred everything, and I mean everything. It doesn’t even matter if the party gets re-elected, they don’t take that chance. The shredders get turned on immdiatly after the election call.
The problem is the partisan nature of these files. Most of these files contain political notes, handwritten ideas etc. Things that an incoming competitor would find useful to attack the outgoing councillor with. Yes, things may get lost in the shuffle, but no matter how we like to delude ourselves, this is politics and politics is about winning, not necessairly about serving the people.
Maybe there should be a policy of withholding the last paycheck until all files are accounted for?
If this was a private business you would not be permitted to remove files like that.
Watson haunts us still……
Mark — That’d be perfect. In fact, since councillors apparently get severance pay, it could simply be made a condition of their severance package. No files, no severance.
Stephen — At the provincial and federal level, don’t the deputy ministers (as permanent, non-political staff) prepare massive briefing packages for newbies? But it seems that at city hall the only record of the hot issues in the ward is held by the councillor’s own people. And if there were clear rules requiring them to hand over the important documents on those issues, I’m sure they could find a way to keep their partisan notes separate.
_Spacing_ has already talked to Adam Vaughan?
About what, and why?
Joe ^ Did you not read the post? About the above mentioned destruction of files.
This sounds a bit whiny. Politicians absolutely shouldn’t have to pass on their files. In fact, in some cases passing them on is even more questionable than NOT passing them on.
Constituency files would likely be the most valuable files to a new councillor. Other official and public documents are surely available from the bureaucracy. But constituency files are personal correspondence and should not be passed on indiscriminately.
Say I write Joe Mihevc or his staff in favour of a housing strategy, or against a certain development, or with a request for help with my welfare, or with concerns about a matter with police. Say I call him send him an email to wish him luck in the election.
Now say the next councillor in that ward is the new Rob Ford. I’ll be damned if I want my correspondence passed on to him for his purposes, and I’d be pretty pissed off if it were. The same may be true of much less personal documents and between two councillors who are much closer ideologically.
I don’t know about that Sandra. My “personal finance manager” at my bank has very personal information on me. Should she move on or get fired, I’d expect whoever takes her place to have my whole file at her disposal. Nobody here said personal correspondence, well wishing, couldn’t be removed from these political files. And personal or political notes shouldn’t be mixed in with regular files anyway.
So, this doesn’t sound whiny at all.
Exactly – this is a privacy issue. Perhaps Vaughan and Perks should ask for a ruling from the ethics commissioner.
Sandra has a great point. Be careful what you wish for people. As Spacing must be well aware by now, municipal issues are very messy because the line between the personal and the political is so blurred that it can’t be easily identified. This is politics, not banking that we’re talking about here.
Perhaps what’s needed is a requirement for councillors to put together a report at the end of each term that outlines what’s going on in their ward,–one that includes a list of applications, disputes, etc. that are in progress–to be sent to the archives and made available to the public. Something similar to a corporation’s Annual Report, but only submitted every four years. Ideally, it would have to be approved by an auditor, just like those annual reports, so that the public and incoming councillors can be assured of their accuracy. If these reports were made available in time for the election, I think it would improve accountability considerably, as consituents would be able to use the report to help them assess the performance of their councillors. New Councillors would know where the last ones left off, but would be sending most of the personal/political baggage of the previous term packing with the previous Councillor.
But as I already said, this is politics, not banking that we’re talking about. I’m sure the logistical and philosophical issues involved in doing this would make this idea more or less impossible, if not downright bad, but I thought I’d throw it out there as an option anyway.