Waterfront Trust scrutiny isn’t going away

THE SPECTATOR’S VIEW

Well, that’s a relief. If you’re one of the many people who thinks not everything is right with the Hamilton Waterfront Trust, you can rest easy.

City council has scrutinized the situation with its usual laserlike intensity and found that, actually, everything is pretty much fine. Oh yes, there are few small matters of transparency and accountability that the trust could have handled better. But aside from that, there’s nothing to see here. Move along.

Don’t worry about the fact that when the trust finally appeared before councillors this week, there were no tough questions about the hundreds of thousands in back taxes owed to the city. Don’t sweat the $260,000 deficit. Or the details of that $15-million lawsuit launched by the evicted tenants from the former Discovery Centre. Don’t worry that the trust doesn’t appear to be sustainable. And don’t you dare have the audacity to ask for an audit of the trust to ensure taxpayers are getting good value. The mere suggestion is “offensive,” according to trust board member and former city councillor Bob Charters.

All that matters is that the trust has done good work in the past, (which is true) and promises to do the same in the future. All is well. Until next time, at least.

One thing that actually could help is if we understood who the trust is responsible to. The answer, right now, appears to be: To itself. Based on what we already know about trust operations and governance, that’s not good enough. Interestingly, a potential solution comes from the trust itself.

Back in August, the trust suggested changes in the makeup of its governing board. Currently, the board is made up of four city appointees and one Hamilton Port Authority appointee. The change would see all five members appointed by the city. That makes sense. But that change alone won’t solve the HWT’s public perception problem.

To address that, the trust must become much more responsive. Minutes and official documents must be posted and accessible. Requests for information about HWT activities and operations must be answered promptly, not take months as has been the case in the past. Vacant board positions should be filled. The board application process should be public and transparent. The HWT should be doing an annual report to the community, with the opportunity for public input, consultation and feedback.

And council needs to change its don’t-worry-behappy attitude toward the trust. The HWT is doing business on behalf of citizens. They trust councillors to oversee and manage public business thoroughly, fairly and equitably. City council has shown it is quite able to do that, but has not done so with the HWT. If that doesn’t change, we’ll be back to this point again soon.