Springfield councillor duo refuse to go in-camera on Sio Silica

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 25/01/2024 (469 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

It took 20 minutes to decide whether to have a discussion in camera or in public at the last RM of Springfield committee of the whole meeting.

In a tense back and forth exchange with Mayor Patrick Therrien, Coun. Mark Miller made it clear he wanted any discussion on the Jan. 9 scheduled in-camera meeting titled “ethics” on the agenda to be held publicly.

Coun. Andy Kuczynski agreed there was no reason to have the discussion behind closed doors and with the public internet feed turned off. Mayor Therrien wanted an RM lawyer to look at the topic first, and Coun. Glen Fuhl agreed.

Coun. Melinda Warren said if it was not in-camera, it could be struck from the agenda. She got her wish when after a lengthy debate between Miller and Therrien, the majority of council agreed to defer the topic.

“We shouldn’t get too far ahead of ourselves quite yet. When they come to ask what they may ask us, then we could release those documents if they are asking for it, the provincial government,” said Warren.

What specifically was going to be discussed was not directly mentioned because it was to be held in-camera, but it was about Sio Silica.

Miller said he and Kuczynski got legal advice that they should not participate with an in-camera meeting.

“I have been advised by legal counsel to not participate in any and all matters that are directly or indirectly associated with Sio Silica which are conducted in a closed-meeting setting, thereby privileged and confidential,” said Miller at the meeting.

He pointed out that under the municipal act, a reason needs to be put on the agenda for why something is held in camera, and the general nature of the topic. An example would be legal discussions or ongoing negotiations on a development.

“So you can’t just say willy-nilly ‘oh yeah, let’s be in-camera.’ This can’t be something you want to withhold from the public because we don’t the pushback or the flack. It has to relate to something specifically to the municipal act. We’ve done this time and time again,” said Miller.

“No more are we going to hide from the public what they deserve to hear, and learn and understand.”

“If we want to discuss now in-camera to see if we want to bring it out of camera, we can do that now,” suggested Mayor Therrien.

He later said this was a legal matter that fell under provincial jurisdiction.

“Technically you made a statement — I don’t want to get too far into this — where you’re essentially speculating on what may or may not happen. This isn’t something for us to be discussing in the first place, this is a provincial government matter. But you’re asking us to open up something that we shouldn’t be opening up to the public,” said Therrien.

Miller said the RM of Springfield had a concerning pattern of behind closed door sessions.

“Why do you always want to put things in-camera to discuss. You don’t want to have things publicly disclosed, do you?” Miller asked Therrien.

Miller touched a nerve when he suggested Therrien was out of touch by not keeping up with media reports of NDP caucus chair Riel MLA Mike Moyes’s request that the ethics commissioner look into allegations that PC Red River North MLA Jeff Wharton tried to get the Sio Silica mining project approved on former Premier Heather Stefanson’s behalf after the PCs lost the election but before the NDP officially took office. The project is still under review by the new government.

“You tend to be dramatic and full of hyperbole. That’s absolute crap. Because I don’t read the paper today you’re saying I’m out of touch? Give your head a shake,” responded Therrien.

“I am, and I can’t believe what you’re saying,” said Miller.

“When do I see you here in the community talking to the people? I’m in the community every fricking day talking to the community,” said Therrien.

“And what do the people say?” asked Miller.

“The people that I talk to, essentially they’re in agreement. They don’t like some of the behaviours of some of the councillors here,” replied Therrien.

“Hear, hear,” said Miller, before Therrien turned the discussion back to the in-camera debate.

‘OK, here we go’

When Therrien asked Miller to provide anything written from a lawyer that gave the advice to not go in-camera, Miller replied he didn’t want to because Therrien was not transparent enough.

“Show me an example,” said Therrien.

And it was off to the races for Miller.

“OK, here we go. Starting, Sio Silica, Clean Environment Commission hearings. You opted and made comments to all of us saying that we could be sued if we didn’t keep a neutral position,” said Miller, who along with Coun. Kuczynski was threatened with legal action by Sio.

“We’re not in jeopardy. Councillor Kuczynski and I received legal, I would call it intimidation letters,” said Miller at the meeting.

“That’s one, and I don’t think it’s baseless. What’s another one?” asked Therrien.

“Well, I guess what I’m trying to say is your advice, your leadership and so forth for the whole Sio project has been doubtful or one would call not as aggressive as councillor Kuczynski and I. We’ve been adamantly opposed to it. You are neutral, I suspect,” said Miller.

Therrien tried to say Miller was also neutral when he signed statements for the Clean Environment Commission (CEC). That touched a nerve for Miller, whose voice rose in disagreement.

“Mr. Mayor, I was never, ever neutral on the Sio Silica. From day one campaigning in my ward to being elected here, never. I was opposed to you even alleging that we were neutral,” said an agitated Miller.

The two went back and forth for a bit.

“So what else is there?” continued Therrien.

“Papadopulos report. Not only did we not have the Papadopulos available for the public, but we didn’t present it tactfully at the Clean Environment Commission,” said Miller.

S. S. Papadopulos and Associates was hired by council for a report on Sio Silica’s proposed Vivian Silica Sand Project. It is available on the RM’s website and outlines concerns around the drilling plans.

Miller told The Carillon this week that Springfield council was told the report came in likely too late to be included in the CEC’s deliberations.

“Johnny come late, right? So we entered it I think the last day that—” started Miller at the meeting.

“Later or not, it was done,” said Therrien.

“C’mon, be realistic. And then the development agreement. You’re supportive to it. That’s on record. I’m against it. Councillor Kuczynski’s against it,” said Miller.

“Well then fine, that’s how democracy works. You can vote whatever way you’d like. That’s fine, what’s wrong with that?” asked Therrien.

“Exactly,” replied Miller.

“Now are you chastising me for voting the way that I thought was the right way?” asked Therrien.

“I think there’s huge inadequacies to the development agreement. I don’t think you do,” said Miller.

“You voted against it. Let’s carry on here. And every one of your statements is bogus,” said Therrien before the majority of council agreed to defer the topic.

Miller not done

Miller told The Carillon he also intended to pursue making more topics public, like discussion around JohnQ, a corporation formed by leaders from several Winnipeg metro area municipalities to help build things like daycares.

Miller pointed out Mayor Therrien is a board member and the RM paid JohnQ $20,000 to be a development partner. Therrien is a board member along with 11 other municipal leaders including in the Southeast Taché Mayor Armand Poirier and Ritchot Mayor Chris Ewen.

“We were sworn to secrecy. Actually, Coun. (Andy) Kuczynski and I bowed out of that secrecy. We didn’t sign the oath so to speak, and so we received no information on John Q and yet we’ve paid into it significantly.

“No reports from the mayor, whose on the board of directors of JohnQ, so we’re kind of concerned with that,” said Miller.