Markham ordered to reconsider its secrecy on failed arena project
Information and Privacy Commissioner's office orders one of 12 documents sought by a rookie councillor released, asks city to ‘revisit’ why it denied access to others

YorkRegion.com
April 5, 2015
Noor Javed

Ontario’s privacy commissioner has ruled that the City of Markham needs to reconsider its reasons for keeping documents related to the failed NHL arena project under wraps.

In her interim report released last week, adjudicator Stella Ball, of the office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC) of Ontario, ordered part of one report, the KPMG work plan agreement, to be made public. She also ruled that exemptions put forward by the city to deny access to the remaining 12 documents, such as solicitor-client privilege and closed meetings, should be revisited.

“The adjudicator orders disclosure of one record, with the exception of some personal information,” writes Ball. “The city is ordered to reconsider all other discretionary exemption claims and may disclose the record to the appellant, if it decides to. . . ”

Markham’s bid to build an NHL-sized arena fell through in 2013, but the reports that led to the $325-million proposal have remained secret — despite attempts by council members and the public to get them released.

Before she joined council, rookie Councillor Karen Rea filed a complaint to the privacy commissioner, after her requests for the documents were repeatedly denied by the city.

“I think it’s a step towards releasing the documents,” said Rea about the IPC’s interim decision. “I hope the city will step up and release them voluntarily without the IPC ordering them to do so,” she said.

“It will be a big step for transparency and accountability.”

In February, Rea had brought forward a motion to have the reports, which cost the city upwards of $700,000, to be made public.

Mayor Frank Scarpitti ruled the motion out of order, after a lengthy discussion on the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA) — provincial legislation that governs public access to information held by municipalities.

At the time, the city said passing resolutions to disclose private information was outside its jurisdiction and it would await the decision of the IPC before deciding how to proceed.

In the report, Ball writes that if the city continues to keep the documents secret after reconsideration, it would be required to provide Rea and the IPC with an explanation.

The city did not respond to a request for comment on the IPC’s decision.

Rea plans to bring the report up at the next council meeting, and will urge council to take the right step before it is ordered to do so.

“I am going to tell them . . . we have the option here to release these reports without waiting for the privacy commissioner to force our hand.”

In her report, Ball suggests public interest alone should be enough to make the city change its mind.

“I find that the city failed to take into account a relevant consideration in exercising its discretion; specifically, the possible public interest. On this basis alone, I would have required the city to re-exercise its discretion,” said Ball.