Markham wants 60 days to review release of secret arena documents

Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario told city to re-examine its reasons for keeping documents from the public.

Thestar.com
April 10, 2015
By Noor Javed

Markham will ask the office of the privacy commissioner for more time to re-examine the reasons for keeping secret certain documents related to the city’s failed NHL arena project.

Last week, in an interim decision, the office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario ordered part of one report critics have been seeking to be made public. It also ruled that reasons the city put forward to deny public access to the remaining 12 documents, such as solicitor-client privilege and closed meetings, should be reviewed.

“The city has begun a re-examination of the relevant records based on the interim orders,” city clerk Kimberley Kitteringham wrote in an email to the Star. “And until this process has been completed (and final orders are issued by the IPC), my office is not in a position to comment any further,” she said.

But in an email sent to councillors obtained by the Star, Kitteringham said she would ask for a 60-day extension due to the “large volume of records” that have to be reviewed, including more than 250 pages.

“Now that the IPC has issued the interim orders and given the change in circumstances that have occurred, my office is supportive of re-examining our previous decisions accordingly,” wrote Kitteringham. “The city has been given a very tight timeframe to respond to the interim orders. Because the volume of records to be reviewed is large, staff has requested a 60-day extension.”

The documents cost the city more than $700,000, and include advice from experts and lawyers about the viability and business case for bringing an NHL-size arena to Markham.

Markham Councillor Karen Rea filed the two appeals to the privacy commissioner in 2012 and 2013 as a private citizen, after her requests for the documents were denied by the city.

Rea says she won’t support a stay.

“I am disappointed that the city would ask for a 60-day extension, considering council’s recommendation (in February) was to expedite the process, not delay it,” said Rea. “This has been going on since 2012, and the city needs to make a decision,” she said.

In its decision, the IPC says Markham should re-examine the reasons for withholding the documents, in light of the fact the project has been cancelled.

Further, if the city continues to keep the documents secret after reconsideration, it is required to provide Rea and the IPC with an explanation.

According to Kitteringham’s email to council, the final decision about how to proceed will be made by her, and not council.

“My office will advise Markham city council once the city has received final orders on these two appeals from the IPC,” she said. “However, as council is not a party to the FOI (freedom of information request) process, this matter will not be placed on an upcoming council and/or committee agenda.”