[The Mississauga Muse]

Dear Urban TOers.

Just letting people know that on Tuesday, December 4, 2007 I attended Caledon Council to document with videotape their debate on the hiring of the "closed meeting investigator" under the Bill 130 Transparency and Accountability provision.

A councillor challenged me about taking still photos (I wasn't) and then told me that before I use his image I'd have to get permission.

And then he said something extraordinary (and this is a transcript):

"I appreciate your interest in what I have to say and the rest of Council--I do have to say that what goes on in Peel stays in Peel."

"what goes on in Peel stays in Peel."

Can you believe that?

So after Council I asked if I could use him image of the Bill 130 Transparency and Accountability debate for YouTube. He freaked. He refused.

I then went to Mayor Morrison and asked how she and the other councillors felt. Same thing, no.

I have since produced the Caledon Bill 130 Transparency and Accountability video with mayor/councillors' faces/bodies blacked out.

But I mean can you BELIEVE that? Forcing me to black out their identities during their Transparency and Accountability debate?

What follows is part of the email I sent to mayors and all councillors of Brampton, Caledon and Mississauga plus Peel Regional Chair, Emil Kolb.

See next message.

Also please see Urban Toronto thread, "Fort Erie Mayor moves to restrict council videotaping" for the reactions of the Fort Erie mayor to a citizen videotaping council meetings there.

 

[The Mississauga Muse]

"what goes on in Peel stays in Peel"

This is a portion of the email I sent to the mayors and all councillors of Brampton, Caledon and Mississauga (Peel) plus Peel Regional Chair, Emil Kolb.

"To repeat, my interest in coming to Caledon pertained exclusively to documenting how your Council dealt with "The Bill 130 Investigator". I'd like people to know that I've also been documenting Bill 130 debates at Brampton and Mississauga councils as well as those at Peel. The week before, I covered the Bill 130 Investigator issue at the Town of Ajax Council, and tomorrow I plan to attend Fort Erie Council. Yes, Fort Erie.

I am acting on what our Ontario Ombudsman told us at the "Right to Know" luncheon on October 31, 2007. He said:

"I think it's time for the citizens to hold, not only the provincial government responsible for how this legislation ended up being a complete cop-out, but as well, how each individual municipality deals with the important 'Right to Know' for its citizens."

And that, Councillor [name removed] is what I am doing--documenting "how each individual municipality deals with the important 'Right to Know' for its citizens." The effort is all-consuming.

What with the unprecedented growth (immigration) in Peel, the GTTA transit thrusts, and this liveable sustainable cities strategic planning, I realize that I'm living at what the Future will look back on as A Pivotal Moment in GTTA-Ontario History.

Now, on to my purpose in writing.

On Tuesday, you, as well as Mayor [name removed] and other councillors, denied me all use of your images on my Bill 130 Closed Meeting Investigator historical-videotape footage of the "new age of Transparency and Accountability" inside Caledon Council. You did however agree to use of the audio, adding that you had no idea why anyone would listen to audio on YouTube.

You are correct. Why bother with just audio.

I am advising you that I will use the video of events that day but will block out your image as well as other Caledon councillors and staff. After all, as I stated at Council on Tuesday, what you sir, were saying and doing--as well as I that afternoon, was HISTORY.

I and I alone am documenting the HISTORY of how the Bill 130 Investigator Issue is being handled by Brampton, Caledon, Mississauga and Peel. There is no one else. No TV station. No newspaper. To my knowledge no other citizen. Just me. I'm a witness to the History of Transparency and Accountability practices in Peel Region--and by population count at least, a large part of Ontario.

Mississauga just concluded a speaker series about a Future-Mississauga. That's what I think about now. I ask myself, what would I, as a citizen, 20, 30, 50 years from now want to know?

Peel 20, 30, 50 years from now might be as rosy as Future-Mississauga predicts. It might be a restrictive citizen-unfriendly hell-hole too. Who knows?

But I do know one thing. A citizen-historian in 2050 equally interested in how Peel evolved during those critical years from 2000 onwards would surely wonder why in the age of inexpensive video and above all, easy storage onto DVD's, Ontario municipalities still insisted on quill-and-paper.

I know if that citizen-historian in 2050 were me, I'd conclude that Ontario municipalities were negligent that they didn't embrace the videotaping of all public meetings for The Future. You see, for me it isn't just the "Right to Know" of those living today. The Future --citizens not even born yet--have the "Right to Know" as well.

Last Tuesday, you asked me several questions and I answered them honestly. I even told you, the Mayor and other councillors that it was my intention to share Bill 130 related video to YouTube. In today's email, I provided even more information and clarification.

I am now asking that you return the favour.

When I was at the microphone I stated that I was a "proud resident of Peel"--that my interests weren't just limited to Mississauga. That I cared about Brampton and Caledon too. Your response to this was the comment--and this is a transcript:

"I appreciate your interest in what I have to say and the rest of Council--I do have to say that what goes on in Peel stays in Peel."

Regarding, "what goes on in Peel stays in Peel." I ask that you elaborate what you mean by that. I think I know what you mean. But I'm fond of saying "thinking isn't knowing."

Next, is "what goes on in Peel stays in Peel" also what Town of Caledon Council believes? For example is "what goes on in Peel stays in Peel" a keystone Caledon Corporate Operating Policy--a kind of "gag order" for staff and elected officials?

To Peel Councillors reading this: Do you concur with Councillor Beffort's comments, "what goes on in Peel stays in Peel"?

I had absolutely no interest in municipal government back in May 12, 2000. However, let me ask you.

If I showed up at Walkerton Council that day with my video camera and a Walkerton Town Councillor had told me,

"I appreciate your interest in what I have to say and the rest of Council--I do have to say that what goes on in Walkerton stays in Walkerton," what do you believe my moral obligations would be as a Canadian citizen back then?

The favour of a reply is requested.

Ursula Bennett
MISSISSAUGAWATCH

[NOTE: Later in the week, on Thursday at Peel Regional Council, two Caledon councillors, Annette Groves and Jason Payne both allowed me use of their images.]

Far as I know there are only two citizens in Ontario videotaping municipal councils and both have seen moves to restrict their videotaping in this "new age of Transparency and Accountability" that Bill 130 was to herald in.

Ya know it's easy to sell bananas for 5 cents a pound when you ain't got none.

 

[Dan416]

This kind of hypocrisy is both outrageous, shocking and sadly, unsurprising, in light of your recent discoveries in regards to Mississauga City Council. I applaud your efforts, Mississauga Muse. Congratulations on documenting what the hell is going on when no one else is.

 

[Hydrogen]

"I appreciate your interest in what I have to say and the rest of Council--I do have to say that what goes on in Peel stays in Peel."

"what goes on in Peel stays in Peel."

Can you believe that?

Well, that is impressive! It would be fascinating to know how they would manage to do that - that is before you leaked it onto this Toronto-based board.

Some people in public life apparently have big problems with the public part.

 

[cacruden]

Once a picture or video is taken of council members, I don't think that legally they can stop it being published since they stood for election and are public figures (not private). The council may (I am not sure of the legislation controlling council) may be able to bar cameras - but unless Ontario has made it a criminal offense - you just get warned and expelled.

I have to say - I really am beginning to dislike the quality of municipal council. I might even be convinced that they should be professional boards put in place. These people are beginning to make me think twice about democracy

 

[doady]

If you are public property there is NOTHING that ANYONE can do to stop you from filming or photographing. It is a violation of your rights if they try to stop you.

Ever since 9/11 there has been a lot of paranoia about cameras everywhere, not just within town council chambres.

 

[The Mississauga Muse]

Just thought I'd provide an update before I reply to your responses.

Yesterday, someone left me a comment in my Blog about Niagara Region having a "public meeting":

The St Catharines Standard article states:

Representatives from Marin’s [Ontario Ombudsman's] office and AMO [Association of Municipalities of Ontario] will address councillors in regional council chambers at 9 a.m. Wednesday.

So yesterday I called Niagara Region and confirmed the time. I then told the lady that I would be videotaping. Let me cut-and-paste from my Blog:

"Just got a phone call from someone at Region of Niagara confirming the time of 9 a.m. Wednesday. I informed her that I would be videotaping. I was told no. I went into an explanation --especially how minutes of municipal meetings can vary wildly. (I really wanted to say that based on my experience, minutes can be the stuff of fiction, but I stifled.)

Anyway, I was told to write an email to her and the Chair and Members of Corporate Services and they will make their decision at the beginning of the "public meeting". I asked whether I could at least audiotape the beginning so as to document their discussion of whether a member of the public has the right to at least audiotape their proceedings on Accountability and Transparency.

I was told no.

So I wrote an email --etc etc etc."

So tomorrow I go to Niagara and I face the possibility of being told that for this important debate on Accountability and Transparency between the Ombudsman's Office and AMO (who tries to convince municipalities to go with their own "investigators") that not only won't I be able to videotape, I won't be able to do an audiotape either.

You know this "We Invite Participation" stuff? This Transparency stuff? This "Accountability" stuff?

And you here writing about city halls being a "public space". Ever wonder why we hear so much about "public space" now?

Because there's LESS and LESS of it.

Each municipality has "public space" --but I don't know of a single municpality that hasn't made "public space", PRIVATE.

Their PRIVATE PROPERTY.

Which means they can pass by-laws regarding their private property. And make no mistake that even their council chambers (and I'm talking any Ontario municipality here) is PRIVATE PROPERTY.

I'm reading a book right now called "The Politics of Public Space". Dudes, the back cover starts, "Why are public spaces disappearing?"

Actually, I don't really have to read the book --I already know. I just want to know if the author knows what I do.

Last comment --there are three "interests" who will be making the decision tomorrow morning about whether I'm allowed to videotape. The Ontario Ombudsman's people. The Association of Municipalities of Ontario people. The Region of Niagara people.

One thing I know for CERTAIN. If I'm not allowed to videotape this Transparency and Accountability "public meeting", it won't be because of Marin's people...

For the letter I sent to Niagara, please see:

written request to Niagara Region to Videotape/Audiotape "Transparency" Meeting

 

[The Mississauga Muse]

Once a picture or video is taken of council members, I don't think that legally they can stop it being published since they stood for election and are public figures (not private). The council may (I am not sure of the legislation controlling council) may be able to bar cameras - but unless Ontario has made it a criminal offense - you just get warned and expelled.

This goes back to my previous email about our illusion of "public space". It's just illusion. It's actually the private property of a municipal corporation. You are correct. A council can do whatever it wants INCLUDING barring cameras and even audio recorders.

There is no more effective way to duck accountabilty than that. It means the public (and people in the future not even born yet) have only "minutes" as a record of a meeting. That is, what the municipality wants the record to say.

A municipality can go forever deceiving its residents that way. ForEVER.

Back to you.

I have to say - I really am beginning to dislike the quality of municipal council. I might even be convinced that they should be professional boards put in place. These people are beginning to make me think twice about democracy

Democracy is an illusion, cacruden. It's easy to prove. Just walk into Council chambers with a video camera. Having done that now in Ajax council, Brampton, Caledon, Fort Erie, Mississauga, Peel, and tomorrow, Niagara Council, I think I've got a pretty good feel for Life, The Universe, Everything in each place.

Accountablity, like "public space" is illusion.

 

[The Mississauga Muse]

This kind of hypocrisy is both outrageous, shocking and sadly, unsurprising, in light of your recent discoveries in regards to Mississauga City Council. I applaud your efforts, Mississauga Muse. Congratulations on documenting what the hell is going on when no one else is.

Appreciated. I just have a lot of problems dealing with it --the hypocrisy and the absolute disregard of Human Rights. I can't go into what I mean by that because I have over a dozen Freedom of Information requests that aren't back yet with answers.

I can tell you this. That the media --and that includes the national papers, tout how wonderful Mississauga is (its success, its shining example to the rest of Canada) shows negligence.

Holding Mississauga up as what all other Canadian municipalities should aspire to is skin-prickly CREEPY. Because it means that citizens can't rely on traditional media (papers, TV, radio) to guard democracy. To give us the necessary heads-up.

And having documented this now since June 2006, (actually observing inside Brampton court) it's YOUTH that get screwed over the most. I'm just so thoroughly ashamed of the entire process. And in Mississauga, we're talking not only about councillors who were once trustees, but a councillor who was even Peel Board chair at one time.

And all have demonstrated to me that it's impossible for them to give less of a shit about Youth and society's vulnerable.

Just WORDS.

 

[The Mississauga Muse]

If you are public property there is NOTHING that ANYONE can do to stop you from filming or photographing. It is a violation of your rights if they try to stop you.

Ever since 9/11 there has been a lot of paranoia about cameras everywhere, not just within town council chambres.

doady, what good are rights when the only way to get them are by paying for a decent lawyer?

That's the other thing I've been documenting --what a mother of an At-Risk Youth would have to go through just to defend her kid. There are no accountability measures in place for municipalities.

Look what Bramptonians had to go through before the Province looked into the condition of their hospital. Not only do people have to die first, but then the living's got to take it into the streets.

There are no accountability measures in place for municipalities. And I can tell you specifically to Mississauga --while they have impressive policies and procedures and yes, guidelines, they're not followed.

It's like they're window dressing only. Paper says we run a tight ship. And then there's the reality. The paper gets put on a shelf to collect dust.

 

[junctionist]

Keep fighting, and don't accept their rhetoric. We have a right to full transparency and accountability. Do you find that Toronto is doing well in regards to this right?

 

[screenplaying]

Keep fighting, and don't accept their rhetoric. We have a right to full transparency and accountability. Do you find that Toronto is doing well in regards to this right?

Depends what your take on In-Camera sessions is. My understanding is that Miller is nowhere close to in-camera shy and rather prefers the no transparency and no accountability part of it. Public council sessions just can't match up!

Anyone have access to this full article? I'm curious...

Provincial law puts new focus on in-camera meetings

Maybe Oshawa leads the transparent pack? Council adopts transparency bylaw