JASON SETNYK
Before the vote at the January 12 meeting, Hébert addressed council directly. “I acknowledge the Integrity Commissioner’s findings and I have apologized for that,” she said, referring to her tone and failure to verify claims. “My intention was never to question anyone’s integrity. It was to speak passionately… to advocate for residents and frontline staff.” She added that she was willing to step away from the Committee of Management if council deemed it appropriate: “That would acknowledge the concerns raised, respect the findings of the report, and allow the committee to continue its work without any distractions.”
After council passed the motion, Hébert delivered a formal apology from the floor: “I’d like to publicly apologize to all parties involved who may have taken offence…I certainly regret any intent that was misinterpreted from my comments.”
Opinions were divided among council members. Councillor Maurice Dupelle initially opposed any reprimand, before voting for a sanction. “I think that my colleague was trying to advocate for the residents. I don’t feel that my colleague has done anything that violates (the Code), except for representing the committee and the staff.”
Councillor Fred Ngoundjo voiced concern about the process itself, noting how vulnerable all councillors are to complaints: “This process is a little bit unfair. We are passionate and trying to do our best. Maybe we should reconsider this system.”
Others emphasized the importance of respecting staff and procedures. “The findings are that our colleague breached our code of conduct,” said Councillor Dean Hollingsworth, who moved the motion. “It’s really not some personal attack — simply to say yes, a mistake was made. For the rest of us, we need to take note not to do the same thing.”
Councillor Claude McIntosh went further, stating he believed Hébert should have resigned from her role as chair of the committee: “When you’re chair of the board, you’ve got to show a certain degree of responsibility. I don’t buy the ‘passion’ excuse.”
Councillor Elaine MacDonald sought to clarify that the changes to staffing were legislatively driven and not the result of political pressure. “The reason tension erupted was because the City was absolutely clear on making changes it had to make… this was an overall benefit for every resident.”
The original recommendation from the Integrity Commissioner called for a reprimand and apology. Council eventually amended the language of the reprimand to more explicitly reflect their concern and expectations, with input from Councillors Denis Sabourin, Sarah Good, and Elaine MacDonald.
The final wording stated that council shares the concerns of the Integrity Commissioner “regarding the Code of Conduct breaches which Councillor Hébert was found to have committed” and “expects that these violations do not happen again.” The apology, which was initially issued in an open letter, was delivered verbally in council chambers as per Boghosian’s expectations.
Boghosian, attending the meeting virtually, acknowledged how uncomfortable these situations can be and suggested an alternative: that municipalities consider delegating the authority to impose penalties directly to the Integrity Commissioner, as other municipalities like Hamilton and Caledon have done.
“This awkward debate about whether you should impose a penalty on a colleague could be avoided,” he noted, emphasizing that his findings should be what matters.
Council took no immediate action on that procedural recommendation, but several members expressed openness to discussing reforms in the future.
CAO Tim Mills thanked Council, staff, and the Integrity Commissioner for the discussion and emphasized the value of collaboration. Referring to the recent resolution at Glen Stor Dun Lodge, he said, “As the team worked together to make the decision and then implement it, you saw when we came to our resolution.” He encouraged early communication between Council and administration, noting, “We get the agendas and the information out as best we can for Council, and we welcome dialogue back from anybody and everybody so that we can work through issues before we publicly disagree, maybe in a tone that we don’t really appreciate amongst each other.”
As the vote concluded, all councillors supported the motion. Hébert’s final remarks appeared to signal closure: “I hope this apology is taken seriously. I certainly regret anyone [being hurt] by my comments.”
The commissioner billed approximately $12,500 (plus HST) for the Hébert matter, covering around 50 hours of work including investigation and report preparation. The hourly rates are $290 for the Commissioner and $215 for his associate.
L’article “Awkward debate:” Members divided as Hébert apologizes est apparu en premier sur Cornwall Seaway News.
