Now that Oro-Medonte Coun. Richard Schell has been reprimanded and had his pay suspended three times in the past 18 months for breaching the township’s code of conduct, some residents are wondering why he’s still on council.
A recent letter to Vilage Media captured their concerns.
“Most taxpayers would conclude that after three reprimands that Coun. Schell does not deserve to hold a councillor position,” Oro-Medonte resident Allan Baker wrote in a letter to the editor. “Mr. Schell’s accumulated financial penalties now represent 45 per cent of his annual salary. That should be enough to get his attention and suggest that he might want to seek alternative employment or at least do the honourable thing and resign.”
On Nov. 14, 2023, the township’s integrity commissioner (IC), John Ewart, said Schell “breached the municipal code of conduct by distributing a court document to five members of council on Aug. 29, 2023 in an attempt to influence council or members of council regarding the subject matter of short-term rentals.”
The breach cost the councillor 60 days’ pay.
Not six months later, in an April 19, 2024 report, Ewart said he received a request for inquiry into an alleged contravention of the municipal code of conduct that happened during a town hall meeting in Hawkestone on Nov. 26, 2023, when Schell presented a factum of the Oro-Medonte Association for Responsible STRs as a court decision and said it showed short-term rentals were legal in the township.
Ewart found Schell did breach the code of conduct by improperly referring to the factum at that meeting as a decision of the Divisional Court, which served to render short-term rentals legal in the township.
The councillor was reprimanded and his pay suspended for 15 days.
Last week, Schell was reprimanded again when the IC determined he “served to hinder or otherwise interfere with the duties of the bylaw enforcement officer” who was conducting an investigation on private property.
The IC recommended a reprimand and that the councillor’s pay be suspended for 15 days.
Township council accepted the recommended reprimand but not the financial penalty, instead voting to increase the penalty and suspended the councillor’s pay for 90 days — six times the original recommendation.
CandiceC, a verified commenter on OrilliaMatters, a sister site to BarrieToday, BradfordToday and InnisfilToday, was direct in her appraisal of the situation.
“Get this guy off the council if he thinks he’s above the law and needs to keep being reprimanded,” she wrote.
Her post was liked by 10 others.
Eman, another verified commenter, noted Schell’s actions are costing the municipality money and he’s not happy about it.
“Soooo this is the same guy who made a huge fuss about county increasing pay for members, and yet he is costing Oro taxpayers for his bad behaviour?” Eman wrote. “I'd like to know what that costs me. He should go, I don't want to have to pay for this guy anymore. Good for council to (dock) him 90 days.
“At least that makes up for some of this unnecessary cost to me,” he added.
According to a township official, the IC billed Oro-Medonte Township $16,781.38 for work on five files in 2023 and $19,688.70 for work on eight files in 2024.
The exact cost of these investigations to the taxpayers of Oro-Medonte is difficult to determine.
According to the township official, the invoices received from the IC are not itemized — they are a lump sum that could include a variety of items, from investigating and responding to complaints to providing advice to council and township staff and responding to public inquiries.
Those invoices are paid from the municipality’s tax levy.
“The township is not in a position to justify the costs of the IC as the IC is mandated by the province,” said Oro-Medonte Mayor Randy Greenlaw. “The justification is a permitted right given to the public as part of the democratic process.”
According to Greenlaw, there is no limit on the number of IC investigations that can be done on an individual member of council and there is relatively little a council can do if it has a rogue member.
“Currently, there is no mechanism in place to remove a councillor except by referral of a finding by the IC to the Superior Court,” he explained. “This referral would be paid for by the municipality.
“Only a judge may declare the seat vacant and bar the individual from running in the next election,” Greenlaw added.
Springwater Township Mayor Jennifer Coughlin is supportive of the IC’s efforts when it’s a member of the public who does the complaining.
She’s not too fond of councillors complaining about councillors, which she said she sees far too often.
An IC report delivered to Springwater council in June 2024 contained the results of three complaints — one from Coun. Phil Fisher against Coughlin, one from Coun. Brad Thompson against Fisher, and one from Adrian Graham, chair of the Springwater Library Board, also against Fisher.
It cost the township $27,000 and was not even three pages long.
“I do feel like integrity commissioners across Ontario are being used as referees in a sandbox when members of council can’t play nice,” Coughlin said during the June 19, 2024 council meeting. “The intent of an IC is for members of the public to hold us accountable to ask those questions.
“I don’t think $30,000 spent on in-fighting is of any benefit,” she added.
The other major challenge with IC reports is they can be simply ignored.
The IC can only recommend sanctions — it’s council’s decision if those recommendations are imposed.
“If the majority of council doesn’t like the IC conclusions, they can vote not to receive it,” Coughlin noted.
In mid-December of last year, Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister Paul Calandra introduced new provincial legislation that would increase penalties for violating a municipal code of conduct.
The bill would allow for the creation of a standard code of conduct for all municipalities, with penalties of removing and disqualifying a member from office if they are in serious violation of the code.
But removal and disqualification could only happen if the municipal integrity commissioner recommends it, if Ontario’s integrity commissioner agrees and if councillors, except for the member in question, unanimously agree to it in a vote.
It’s expected to be revisited following the election.