A recent ruling by the East Ferris Integrity Commissioner has left some residents wondering how much financial interest is required before a conflict must be declared.
“What would make it significant?” asks Maggie Preston-Coles, referencing the findings of Integrity Commissioner David King last month.
Preston-Coles asked King to investigate her allegation that the East Ferris Planning Advisory Committee chairman John O’Rourke should have declared a conflict on a subdivision application March 27, 2019. As King’s report notes, O’Rourke co-owns the Brownstone Kitchen and Bath in North Bay and does installations for the developer of the subdivision in question.
The Brownstone lists the developer’s main business, Degagne Carpentry, as one of their “quality partners” and they are in a promotional photo together for a contest giveaway.
King found that there was direct interest for O’Rourke but ruled that, because they are not in a financial partnership and Degagne’s customers can choose kitchen and baths from a variety of options, that it was “remote and insignificant.”
King’s report noted that O’Rourke has been well involved in the community for three decades as a hockey coach, chairman of a parent-teachers’ association, and volunteer firefighter.
“I have lived in East Ferris for over 30 years and would have to declare a conflict on approximately 85 per cent of all applications based on knowing the parties,” he said, as quoted by King in the report. “In fact, the whole committee would also have to declare based on this as well.”
Preston-Coles, however, maintains that there’s a difference in knowing someone as a potential customer than actually doing past, present or future business with a residential subdivision developer.
Related: East Ferris, LPAT testing teacher's patience
Related: East Ferris planning chairman cleared of pecuniary interest allegations by integrity commissioner
Related: Letter - East Ferris conducted robust public process in 25-lot subdivision development
She said it’s surprising that King would agree there is a direct interest, a conflict, but then dismiss it as “insignificant, remote” without asking exactly how much business is transacted between them. Degagne’s Carpentry, she explains, has developed multiple subdivisions in East Ferris and has numerous individual residential lots listed for sale.
King, she said, should have asked how many kitchens and bathrooms Brownstone has installed for Degagne over the years so it’s clear how much pecuniary interest he has or doesn’t have.
Phil Koning, who has written several letters to council about public matters, has his own concerns about how East Ferris is handling the issue.
Koning made his thoughts public by posting them on a Facebook page he created prior to the last municipal election in 2018, called Elected by You – East Ferris.
He was reacting to a media release East Ferris circulated about news coverage about Preston-Coles’ fight against the subdivision and complaints to the Integrity Commissioner.
“The municipal response to the report,” Koning wrote, “seemed to indicate the issue of conflict of interest for Mr. O’Rourke has been resolved. Unfortunately, I do not think that is the case.”
Koning referenced negative feedback regarding development during a municipal survey in 2019. He said, “The only way to counter the growth of that attitude is to provide clear evidence of unbiased decisions and absence of any conflicts.”
He said King’s report substantiated those concerns without quantifying the line municipal representatives must stay within.
“This is where Mr. King’s report falls flat, in my view,” Koning wrote, “…it does nothing to dampen the controversy.”
By stating that the pecuniary interest is “too remote or insignificant to influence behaviour,” Koning said King left a major question begging to be answered.
“I would think the amount of business historically generated by the relationship would be a better indicator of its significance than the structure of it,” he said, referring to King’s assertion that it wasn’t a true partnership and not exclusive between them.
Koning also felt King should have looked into the municipality’s boards and committee policy, developed by council, and not be limited by the Municipal Act.
He said East Ferris advises members to declare a conflict to avoid the “appearance” of conflict, and it’s clear from King’s report that there was direct pecuniary interest.
“There is no discussion of penalty in the policy, but certainly the fact that a municipality’s policy was not followed puts the entire process in jeopardy,” Koning said.
The Integrity Commissioner’s report also noted that the planning advisory board doesn’t make final decisions only recommendations. He also said there’s no record of O’Rourke voting on the subdivision plan (a recorded vote wasn’t requested so the minutes don’t reflect who participated in the decision).
Koning said the responsibility falls to council to ensure transparency and accountability for all its committees, agencies, boards, and commissions where East Ferris is represented.
“Council members are the ones who should be seeking clarification of these apparent omissions in the Commissioner’s report since ultimately they will be held accountable,” he said.
East Ferris Mayor Pauline Rochefort, through chief administrative officer/treasurer Jason Trottier, declined to comment when asked about the points raised by Preston-Coles and Koning. O’Rourke said he didn’t want to “stir the pot” by commenting and King didn’t respond to an email query sent Tuesday. Degagne Carpentry wasn’t asked for comment because nobody has alleged any wrong-doing or policy breach by the developer.
King noted in his report that he still investigating Preston-Coles other complaint regarding the conduct of council. She said council had a duty to look into her concerns about O’Rourke’s business conflict when she raised it. And she said council and members of the municipal staff have made residents feel their presence and input unwelcome at the meetings.
Preston-Coles has also approached the Ontario Ombudsman about the Integrity Commissioner’s investigation and report but feels it may not be worth her time and effort. She said the Ombudsman can only review the process King followed and not his ruling.
Preston-Coles said she has enough on her plate preparing for a Local Planning Appeal Tribunal hearing she requested over council’s approval of the 25-lot subdivision plan. LPAT rescinded its acceptance of changes to her application this summer and recently asked East Ferris to put forward a motion to dismiss it entirely. Meanwhile, Preston-Coles is awaiting word about her complaint about lack of communication from the LPAT staffer assigned to her case, which is supposed to come before Friday.
Dave Dale is a Local Journalism Reporter with BayToday.ca. LJI is funded by the Government of Canada.
