Councillors sought to question Mayor Dave Aspden on the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services (OCCPS) affair, but he repeatedly invoked client-solicitor privilege to dodge the queries. It all turned a little surreal, with Coun. Michael Prowse lamenting the whole session resembled a Keystone Cops routine.

It didn’t have to be this way. Even at this late date the mayor had a relatively easy way out. He could have said he was sorry, had learned a hard but valuable lesson and would try to do better in the future.

Instead, what council, and residents, got was: “I will not debate or discuss the issue. It is a matter of client-solicitor privilege.” He said this over and over, and over, again.

The OCCPS investigation was launched after the mayor wrote a letter of support last January for a Barrie police officer who had been found guilty of discreditable conduct. He wrote it on city letterhead a few days after becoming chair of the Barrie Police Services Board.

The investigation was to determine if Aspden had broken a code of conduct by infringing on police operational matters. Two weeks ago he pleaded guilty, thus avoiding a formal OCCPS hearing. A public airing of the questions councillors now want answered was sidelined.

Councillors had every reason to expect answers. Last week when they tried to engage the mayor about the affair, he said he would bring his lawyer to council Monday night. However, Monday arrived and the lawyer wasn’t there to answer questions.

All council got was: “I will not debate or discuss the issue. It is a matter of client-solicitor privilege.”

The mayor wouldn’t say when his lawyer could attend, nor did he commit to such a meeting ever happening. The reasons for this remain unknown, as the mayor provided no explanation.

It’s just not good enough. The mayor owes the residents of this city an explanation why he acted the way he did throughout the whole course of the sorry affair.

Questions include:
1) According to Coun. Barry Ward, two weeks before the mayor wrote the letter in support of the officer, asking a disciplinary hearing chairperson to go easy on him, he had cautioned councillors against doing something similar. Why did he apparently ignore his own advice?
2) It has been reported the mayor took governance training that dealt with the very situation that got him into trouble. Why didn’t alarm bells go off when he was considering writing the letter?
3) Nine months after the mayor wrote the letter, he pleaded guilty. Why did he wait that long to come to this conclusion? Barrie taxpayers are on the hook for more than $10,000 in legal fees for the mayor.
4) The city’s Indemnification Bylaw protects city officials facing legal action if it’s found the official acted honestly and in the best interests of the city. Being judged, as Aspden was, to have made an honest mistake would effectively provide protection, including legal fees, for the official. According to Coun. John Brassard the language of the bylaw and the OCCPS ruling is so similar it’s “uncanny.” How did this happen?

Why didn’t the mayor just say he was sorry, and that he would do better in the future? That’s what a leader would have done. Instead, 2008 will dawn on a city with a council increasingly at odds with the mayor, still seeking answers related to his judgment.