It’s not my style to toot horns, but I think I know a fair bit about municipal councils in Ontario and the legislation that guides whether or not they can consider something behind closed doors. It’s a frequent allegation that councils consider things behind closed doors when they shouldn’t be doing so.

Take a look at snippets of this exchange on Twitter May 6:

@exphugo @betterbrantford discussion prob abt #Agrislums #land grab or litigation of #Marketsq lease bit.ly/V4xKWN

— R Langer (@RositaLanger) May 7, 2013

@rositalanger @betterbrantford Wrong on both counts. You should read agendas. Really.

— Hugo Rodrigues (@EXPHugo) May 7, 2013

For those who want, the agenda for the meeting in question is below. As I’ve written here in the past, municipalities can go behind closed doors to consider things. While others would take a “government should never do anything in secret,” approach, the law permits them to under limited circumstances (only one of which — “education sessions” — I actually disagree completely with).

Councils are given, under law, the same ability to meet with their lawyer, receive legal advice, negotiate with employees, negotiate land deals as you or I or any other person. This is reasonable— the confidentiality provisions we expect when we’re doing these things on our own behalf can be extended to responsible councils. The key in the municipal legislation is that while direction can be given behind closed doors, decisions must be made in a publicly convened, open meeting of the municipal council.

Provincial legislation also forces councils to — with appropriate notification — make available an agenda stating the subject matter of what they’re to discuss in-camera, as well as the exemption under which they’re doing so. That has to be read aloud and voted on before the in-camera session begins. Bad councils ignore this, and move in and out of closed session at will. When followed, this eliminates the possibility that a council goes legitimately behind closed doors to discuss subject A, but then chats about subject B or C.

If that does happen, a closed-session investigator has the ability to admonish that council, and if something was considered behind closed doors illegally, compel the council to release and disclose.

In this case, it was a potential lease for the Brantford and District Civic Centre. Legit reason for closed-door meeting (and the lease agreement, should there be one, is approved in PUBLIC session). That’s it, that’s all.

Kudos to Laurier Brantford journalism student Allison Leonard, who’s finally publishing the outcome of the work she’s been doing all year on the Victoria Street Clinic.

For those catching up, the clinic is Brantford’s only methadone clinic — and the closest one for a number of surrounding areas as well.

Leonard’s curiousity was sparked when the location of the clinic — in a church at Darling and George Streets in the heart of Brantford’s downtown — was brought before city council almost a year ago by the Downtown Brantford Business Improvement Area (DBBIA). The DBBIA’s position on the clinic is quite clear. In a nutshell, “go away.”

It included a number of interviews on the subject of methadone treatment and this specific clinic with people of prominence in the community, one of which I Storified in a previous blog post. I ran into Leonard and a few cohorts at the Canadian University Press conference back in January (wearing my Canadian Association of Journalists hat), where we again spoke briefly about this project.

Find one of a promised number of pieces on the website for Laurier Brantford’s student newspaper, the Sputnik.

Kudos to Leonard for putting the time in on this, which included actually spending time in the clinic itself. Her dialogue — inner and with patients — from inside the clinic is the best part of the piece, in my opinion. See here:

“I bet you’re surprised to see kids here, and people with money too.,” says Jim, smirking.
I am.
Seats fill as quickly as they empty. Each time a name is called and a patient leaves, someone of a different age, race or economic class replaces them. I quickly become aware of the preconceived thoughts I had walking in the door.
I am so naive.

Or here:

“So what’s this article about anyway?” Jaime asks, folding herself into the original seat opposite myself. “How everyone wants the crack-heads as far away from the university as possible?”
I hope it not about just that.  I lean forward for a moment as if reaching for a better answer. Our body structures are a perfect parallel again.  I try to formulate an appropriate response, returning to the mirror in my mind.
We probably felt the joys and trials of first loves, best friends and adulthood at the same time. We probably went to prom the same year. We’re probably both wondering what we’ll be doing when we’re 40.
“Everyone wants students like you to move to town.” She speaks before I’ve even opened my mouth. “But not us methadone patients.” Jamie, Jim and Jordyn all rise, ready to leave and I follow them to the door.

Worth a read, regardless of your opinion on the clinic and its location.