A dissenting opinion from the concerned citizens

They took their time in fashioning a reply, but in the end they were left less than impressed, by the observations of George Paul (pages fourteen to sixteen of council minutes), the third party investigator tasked by the city of Prince Rupert to investigate concerns over a hiring decision made by Mayor Herb Pond.

The “concerned citizens” group found out the results of the report at that special session of Council on October 16, a short notice opportunity to learn the details, though one that provided not much in the way of being able to ask questions, or learn more of the details of the process that delivered it.

Even upon attending the special public session, they still are seeking answers to their questions, regarding the process of the hiring of Tanalee Hesse. Also of interest is the process of the investigation into that through council and now the objectivity of the third party investigator out of Prince George.

They feel that Mr. Paul may have too much of an inter-personal relationship with the main participants of the controversy to be truly impartial. Their concerns in that regard, are based mainly through the usual government to government relationships that he may have had with the city as well as any past shared interests along the municipal network of officials and the assorted associations that they all may belong to.

With their outstanding concerns still not addressed in a satisfactory fashion, they are pushing ahead to keep the issue in the forefront of the local scene.

To that goal, the group is taking the city up on the offer to present six questions in writing for the next city council meeting, this Monday evening. The second to last chance before the Municipal election, to ask the current council for their observations on the issue and to outline their involvement in the process.

Among some of their points are: the quest for full details of the duties of Ms. Hesse during the course of her contract; summaries of all services provided by and payments made to Gordon Howie over the last two years, beyond his regular city salary; provide the same information package to them that the city provided to Mr. Paul and provide details of all the Freedom of Information requests made over the past year, including date of receipt and actions taken.

Though they are probably wishing that the opportunity included the chance to ask questions of council and receive answers in the public form as opposed to the submitted list of questions requested.

Whether Monday’s council meeting provides them with enough material to answer their questions remains to be seen, but one thing is certain, the issue won’t be going away even if the current council does on November 15th.

It seems to have become a matter of principle for them and one suspects that it is something they will wish to have all candidates for office address during the current campaign.

They group already has an idea as to how candidates Gina Garon and Anna Ashley feel about the issue, it will be up to the other thirteen candidates to decide if it warrants enough of their time and interest for inclusion into the local discussion on municipal government these days.

Once the concerned citizens crafted their reply to the latest developments, their rebuttal in the debate was covered by both local newspapers which outlined the latest developments in the still percolating issue.

Concerned citizens say consultant's report unacceptable
By Shaun Thomas
The Northern View
Published: October 23, 2008 11:00 AM
Updated: October 23, 2008 11:56 AM

The Committee of Concerned Prince Rupert Citizens has released their official comment on the report prepared by George Paul and submitted to city council last week and say that if six of their questions and requests for information are not provided for, they see the report as nothing more than “an attempt by the city to gloss over the fact that this Mayor and Council has been conducting public business contrary to its own policies and good governing principles”.

Among the requests are details on the services provided and the reports or papers prepared by Tanalee Hesse, the services provided by Gord Howie for all payments made to him as a supplier to the city, legal opinion on the legitimacy of the contracts and the procedures followed in her hiring, the line items and internal breakouts in the 2006, 2007 and 2008 budgets where her retention was contemplated and planned for, all of the background information provided to Paul by the city for the report and the details on the number of FOI requests in the last year and how much money the city received for those requests.

“While the report was careful to offer excuses or mitigating circumstances on why policies and procedures were not followed, the committee does not agree the mere fact that Ms. Hesse’s name appears in minutes as Acting Corporate Administrator serves as public notice of the spousal relationship between her and Mr. Howie, the Chief Administration Officer, nor the potential for conflict of interest. Further, there are numerous other local contractors that were not provided an opportunity to bid on these lucrative contracts,” said the committee in a statement.

As well as taking issue with the contents of the report, the committee said it takes issue with the selection of George Paul, a consultant with 30 years experience in municipal government, to investigate the matter.

“The committee had been hopeful that the Mayor and council would choose an independent auditor that is free from any appearance of bias and is disappointed in the choice of Mr. Paul who is a colleague of Mr. Gordon Howie. Both Mr. Howie’s and Mr. Paul’s association dates back to at least 2002 when they both served together on the Peer Support Committee for the Local Government Management Association.”

“Frankly, we see little purpose in having Mr. Paul travel to Prince Rupert to present this report which has not addressed the community concerns,” the committee concluded.


Report about contract sparks new questions
Concerned citizens still seeking answers
By George T. Baker and Monica Lamb-Yorski
The Daily News
Friday, October 24, 2008
Page three

The third-party report released last Thursday's on the way in which a contractor was given a no-bid contract was supposed to answer the questions many in Prince Rupert were asking. However, the self-stylized Committee of Concerned Prince Rupert Citizens is not satisfied, yet.
Committee spokesperson Wilf Rimmer said that the group will not rest until it has received a full honest answer to questions surrounding why the contract was offered.

"I think (we'll back off) when we actually determine the real reason for hiring (Tanalee) Hesse," said Rimmer. "And, frankly, the original two-and-a-half months that she was hired to cover the period between Tom Ireland and Doug Jay is a non-issue for us. I don't really think that is something to get up in arms about but I think the fact that city council allowed the mayor to retain a contractor for a period of 18 months, that is an issue. I mean who is watching these things?"

The group is now posing six questions for the city to answer and hopes to have them answered by council.

Council candidate Anna Ashley, who is also a part of the committee, said she personally was not satisfied by Paul's report.

"The report is not worth the paper it's written on and is an extreme disappointment," said Ashley.

Ashley wondered if Paul could be considered a third-party investigator when she believes he has been involved in past Local Government Management Association of BC committees with Gord Howie and Hesse.

"Council had a chance to do things properly and they chose not to. It was not a truly independent third-party impartial report since all of the parties involved in the investigation have a direct or indirect pecuniary interest in maintaining a good relationship with the city and therefore aren't impartial," said Ashley, who went on to add "the report is incomplete in its scope and lacks specifics to substantiate its findings as well as any specifics as to how the investigation was conducted. The report does not specifically address the violation of Section 122 of the Community Charter and the report lacks any credibility and is simply damage control by the city, therefore there is no point in having the city investigate further."

The original report by Paul found that Hesse's contract value at $50 per hour was more than reasonable, finding that it could have cost the city 15 per cent more than what they paid Hesse.
He found that the city had acted appropriately as it pertains to awarding the contract and that it had fulfilled its requirements under the Freedom of Information Act.

The committee is submitting the following six clarifying questions to the mayor and city council;

1. Would the council provide full details on what activities were performed by Ms. Hesse during the term of the contract and the actual output produced, reports, memo's, position papers etc. to address the committee's request to ascertain whether value was received for the expenditures totaling in excess of $109,000?

2. Would the city provide a summary on what the services were for all 2006, 07 and year-to-date 2008 payments made to Mr. Gordon Howie as a supplier to the city, its affiliates, commissions and companies over and above his usual salary while he served as Chief Administration Officer of Prince Rupert?

3. Would the council kindly provide the committee of concerned citizens with the legal opinions that address the legitimacy of the contracts and procedures followed in retaining Ms. Hesse's services?

4. Would the council point the committee to the line items and internal breakouts in their 2006, 07 and 08 corporate administration and general corporate administration expense budgets wherein the retention of Ms. Hesse was contemplated and planned for?

5. Would the council provide the committee with the same background material provided to Mr. George Paul on which he based his conclusions and observations, together with all correspondents between the city and Mr. Paul regarding this report?

6. Would the city provide a summary of the number of FOI requests that have been received by the city in the past year showing the date of the request, the date the request was fulfilled, the time spent by staff fulfilling these requests and the compensation received by the city for FOI fulfillment.