59 Carden St.

No target number for utilities: energy ministry

Posted by Magda
During Guelph Hydro-Horizon merger talks, part of the motivation was the oft-repeated suggestion that Queen's Park only wanted to deal with 10 utilities (not the current 76-ish) and would force utilities to merge if necessary. Various reporters repeatedly asked where that number came from, and no one seemed to know.

Now, through FOI, I've secured a provincial policy note, dated July 28, from the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure that says these interesting things:

• "There is no specific provincial target as to the appropriate number of electricity distributors in Ontario" and
• "Any decision to see local electricity assets is determined by the municipal shareholder based on an assessment of its needs and options."

I've made a similar request for information to the Ministry of Finance, which is where the decision to offer and then extend a tax holiday on hydro mergers originated. That request is going less well -- they said it would cost more than $2,000, so I've narrowed my search. Stay tuned on that one.

And in the meantime, read more merger news in tomorrow's paper.

Instruction manual

Posted by Magda
Last January, the province created a system that lets citizens file a complaint if they believe their council is inappropriately meeting behind closed doors.

Today, they've released a handbook that details how this system works. It's a bit of a dry read, but if you're interested, you can find it online. I've never heard complaints about closed meetings in Guelph, but you can read here about some of the investigations the ombudsman's office is conducting, including one on closed meetings in Oshawa.

More Kennedy details

Posted by Magda
City staff have brought to my attention that today’s story on David Kennedy’s compensation wasn’t entirely clear. Here, for the sake of clarity, is the chronology:

• the Mercury asked the city for documents related to David Kennedy’s departure
• the city denied access to the records
• the Mercury appealed
• the information and privacy commission responded to the appeal, first through mediation and, when that failed, through adjudication
• the commission ruled the city needed to release some, but not all, of the documents requested. Details on what they decided to release are here

Read the story in today's paper, here.

Two years, five months

Posted by Magda
Former finance director David Kennedy got a payout from the city equivalent to two years, five months of his salary. That comes to just over $340,000, less deductions. The agreement stipulates that if Kennedy secures alternate employment, the city will pay a lump sum equal to half of the remaining payments.

Kennedy, you might remember, left the city mysteriously in July 2007. I filed a freedom of information request at the time to find out why he left and how much he got. The city denied the request, so it went to mediation and then adjudication, which resulted in me finally getting the settlement along with a few emails related to his departure.

The documents do little to explain why he left, though there is a letter from Hans Loewig, chief administrative officer, to Kennedy dated July 9, 2007, saying this:

"the City of Guelph has undertaken a review with respect to the operation of the city's finance department. This has resulted in a decision that your employment with the city will no longer be continued after [date blacked out]."

There is a clause in the agreement that specifically states it will not be released through freedom of information request.

"The employee and employer acknowledge and agree that the parties would not enter into this agreement absent such provision," the agreement says.

I talked to Loewig this morning regarding that clause, and he said he considers the information in the agreement to be private, which is why the clause is there. "Personal information is personal information," he said.

Read more about this in the Mercury tomorrow.

• Kennedy details, Sept. 12, 2008
• Shouldn't be harder for journalists, Feb. 1, 2008

Still under investigation

Posted by Magda
An update on my freedom of information request regarding odours at All Treat farm composter in Arthur: the investigation is ingoing.

The back story: I wrote a story in June about the odour issue from Arthur's composter. At the time, staff with the Ministry of the Environment said charges were not on the table for All Treat, even though the City of Guelph had been charged, seemingly in a similar scenario.

The difference was that "All Treat has submitted an acceptable odour action plan to reduce odours at the site," Dolly Goyette, a district manager with the Ministry of the Environment, said at the time.

It wasn't until I filed a formal request for information regarding the odours that I found out the ministry was in fact investigating All Treat with a view to charges. At the time, Fred Ruiter of the information and privacy commissioner's office said I should call back in the fall, because the investigation might be over.

The long and the short of it is, it's not.  Stay tuned.

Kotseff decision

Posted by Magda
It's true, I've got freedom of information on my mind. The decision to release former CAO Larry Kotseff's contract has now been posted online. In case you're curious, here it is. I'll post the Kennedy one once it's available.

Kennedy details

Posted by Magda
At long last, I've received the province's decision on whether the city should release details of former finance director David Kennedy's sudden departure.

The answer is: in part.

I'm getting portions of the following:

• a letter from the CAO to David Kennedy, discussing the contents of the minutes of settlement and release;
• the minutes of settlement and release (except for the date of his last day of work);
• email correspondence involving city staff (except for reference to the number of years of service).

I'm not getting a briefing note used by the CAO to brief council, or a letter from Kennedy's lawyer to the city, discussing contents of the minutes of settlement.

The information is coming by mid-October. Stay tuned...

It's in the mail

Posted by Magda
Apparently the decision on whether we're getting any information on the departure of former finance director David Kennedy is in the mail. So says the woman I just spoke from at the office of the information and privacy commissioner. We should have the decision -- though not the information -- by the end of the week.

Un-freedom of information

Posted by Magda
Council is set to vote on the hydro merger Sept. 29. If all goes the way hydro folk would like it to, councillors will vote based on a business case none apart from them have seen. Councillor Mike Salisbury has been trying to get the business case released, without success. (Merger information, including a summary of the business case, is available here.)

My colleague Lisa Varano filed a formal freedom of information request for the business case. It was turned down. We appealed, and today we've heard that, as is protocol, a mediator has been assigned to the case and if mediation fails, it will go to adjudication. The problem is, this situation is really time sensitive. It's likely that in 19 days, it'll all be over. If my experience is any indication, it'll take many times that to get this issue resolved.

I requested Larry Kotseff's compensation package May 7, 2007. I got the information July 15, 2008.

I requested information related to the departure of former finance director David Kennedy on July 17, 2007. That hastn' yet been resolved.

It seems to me that, even if the province eventually rules the hydro business case should be made public, it'll get be well into 2009 -- and the utilities will be long merged, or not -- before we see it.

Denied

Posted by Magda
When Guelph Hydro folks recently came to the paper for an editorial board meeting, my colleague, Lisa Varano, asked them for the business case behind the proposed merger with Horizon Utilities. She was told it wouldn't be released because of confidentiality agreements.

She made a formal freedom of information request to the city for the business case and today learned it had been turned down. The request is being refused because disclosure would reveal third party commercial or financial information given to the city in confidence, the letter says. It would also reveal information whose disclosure could harm the financial interests of an institution or prejudice the economic interests of an institution; instructions to be applied to negotiations carried out by an institution; and plans relating to management of personnel of an institution that have not yet been made public.

Lisa is appealing the decision. Based on our track record with such things, the outcome will come continue far, far after the merger decision is made.