Go back
Features


CDs

NNSL Logo .
 Email this articleE-mail this story  Discuss this articleOrder a classified ad Print window Print this page

Supreme Court puts limits on council secrecy

Adam Johnson
Northern News Services
Wednesday, July 18, 2007

YELLOWKNIFE - A recent Supreme Court of Canada decision to limit city council secrecy reverberates strongly with Yellowknife city council's own history.

Last month, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a London, Ont. city council was wrong to hold a meeting in camera and then quickly vote to scrap a controversial development project.

"The city council's conduct in closing the two meetings in question was neither inadvertent nor trivial," Justice Louise Charron said in the judgment.

"Municipal law was changed to require that municipal government hold meetings that are open to the public in order to imbue municipal governments with a robust democratic legitimacy."

Nearly 10 years ago, Yellowknife was embroiled in a court case of its own, which resulted in committee meetings being opened to the public.

"It was a common practice to hold a lot of informal council information meetings in camera," said five-term Coun. Bob Brooks.

"The reason given at that time was so that members could speak freely and say whatever they wanted and not worry about being ostracized by press or others."

This practice, however, resulted in a court challenge from the Yellowknife Property Owners Association.

The furors erupted when the city attempted to take houseboat owners to court to collect on city taxes.

The decision, the association claimed, was made behind closed doors, and hastily brought to bear in council with little debate.

While Brooks said he and former Coun. Blake Lyons spoke out against the secrecy, it was former Coun. Dick Peplow who made the most headlines, actively aligning himself with the Yellowknife Property Owners Association.

During the appointment of Brooks (then a former councillor) to council in 1997 to replace resigned Coun. John Dalton, Peplow spoke out about the secrecy surrounding the decision, which was made in camera.

"This is a perfect example of how secret meetings work," Peplow said at the time.

"We made the decision in secret, but we're still going through the formality of rubber-stamping it at committee and city council to make it legal.

"We do all the hard debating in secret, then everything that happens in public is like a little show for the folks," he said.

Then-president of the association Matthew Grogono said it remarkable to see a councillor willing to side with an organization and, essentially, "take himself to court."

"He was a great guy," Grogono said.

The verdict came down May 27, 1998. NWT Supreme Court Justice Howard Irving ruled the secret meetings were contrary to territorial law.

While they were intended to be informational, he found they "did develop consensus on the issues facing the city."

By then, secret meetings had been all but scrapped.

Brooks said the new system works better for both voters and for councillors, as the majority of council work now takes place in public.

"This is my fifth term on council and certainly this has been the most open one," he said.