A bit more transparency at city hall
New provincial rules will give the public a look at what’s being talked about in camera
The general public is now getting a glimpse of what happens behind closed doors at city, town and county council meetings — but just a glimpse — after new local governance rules were brought in by the province.
Councils, committee and commissions typically convene prior to public meetings to discuss financial planning, potential liabilities or contentious issues.
Those meetings are “in camera”, a latin term meaning in a chamber, but essentially privacy is the goal.
While they are allowed in a host of circumstances, they are also a point of criticism from citizens who call for more transparency at city halls.
The Town of Redcliff’s meeting procedures were audited five years ago and found wanting.
Now, changes in the Municipal Government Act that took effect following the 2017 municipal elections require local governments to list topics discussed.
As well, the relevant section of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (commonly called FOIP) must be listed as reasoning for discussing the issue out of public view.
The practice began at the City of Medicine Hat committee meetings in November and at city council’s Dec. 4 meeting. On that agenda, 10 headings described “Human Resources Business,” “Lease Matter” and “Utility Division Business,” but not much else.
City clerk Angela Cruickshank is also the city’s FOIP co-ordinator, and says beyond the listing of topics, new regulations conform to what the city was doing already.
“(The changes) cleared up some vagueness, defined what a meeting was and required the reason why a council would go into closed,” she said.
Her position is that in camera meetings protect the city as much as the privacy of third parties — such as contractors, employees and citizens or businesses that have issue with the city.
“The city is a little unique in that we also have an oil and gas business and a land development business — those aren’t third parties, but (early planning discussions) could reveal information that gives a strategic advantage to competitors.
“We’re mostly protecting the privacy and business interests of third parties that fall under FOIP. We’re a public organization, and we try to balance those rights.
“Ultimately, most of the things that are discussed in closed come to open (meetings) in the end.
Any legal settlement, contract or decision of a council must be made public and voted on open session. Prior to that, both acts make allowances for cases when preliminary disclosure could harm personal privacy, public safety, intergovernmental relations or economic interests.
Elected officials also hear confidential advice from lawyers, managers and consultants prior to deciding on issues, and legislation recognizes that some is necessarily privileged.
The standard is usually described by public servants as “land, legal, labour” as topics first discussed in closed sessions.
However, controversy has arisen in the past about how often and why meetings are closed.
In 2011, citizens of Redcliff petitioned council and the Municipal Affairs ministry to audit the town’s meeting records
It found that “for the most part” things were in accordance but also found “improper and irregular” application of in camera meetings. Such sessions would last up to four hours while open meetings often featured no discussion, motions were approved unanimously on votes taken long after members of the media or public had left.