CAO Settlement Explains $43K Salary Jump

Why did council approve a costly legal settlement on behalf of taxpayers without providing more details to the public?

Municipal leadership salaries in Northern Ontario have been a big concern as of late. Earlier this year, leaked documents out of Sudbury showed that the town CAO had authorized an 8% salary increase for top management. Despite these revelations, most councillors did not dare to criticize or seek to hold the CAO accountable. That appears to be the trend for most municipal politicians. For some reason, municipal elected officials seem reluctant to holding their CAOs accountable.

This has never been more obvious than in West Nipissing. This town has had the same CAO for over twenty years. He has lived through the 2016 scandal whereas two of his city managers were charged and convicted of defrauding the municipality. One of these direct reports was then promoted to become the CAO of neighbouring French River shortly after. A position he still holds to this day.

Then, during the 2018-2022 term, West Nipissing’s CAO embarked on a tumultuous and oftentimes unprofessional relationship with the elected officials of this town.

Although most of the country knew that the 2018-2022 West Nipissing council had serious disagreements that led to several cancelled meetings, the root cause of these disagreements was never widely reported.

It was clear to anyone watching council meetings during this term, that the CAO did not respect some of the councillors. This was on clear display during many meetings but never more so at the January 18th, 2022 meeting which was captured by a West Nipissing resident before it was mysteriously removed from Youtube (seemingly against municipal protocol).

To anyone watching that January 2022 meeting, the condescension towards council is glaringly obvious. But this wasn’t the only time this happened. This behaviour was often the norm at council meetings.

Role of the CAO Leads to Chaos on Council

The disagreements of the prior council seem to have started when some attempted to press for greater transparency on expenses from the administration early in the term. This led to a hostile relationship between one group of councillors and the CAO.

In 2021, West Nipissing’s former mayor wanted to address serious issues regarding the role of the CAO as well as obvious disagreements and unprofessionalism. In September, using proper procedure, she added an item to the agenda to “discuss the duties of the municipality’s chief administrative officer.” Also on the agenda was an ongoing complaint by the CAO that was to be discussed in a closed meeting.

This led to five months of missed meetings. In support of the CAO, councillors Dan Roveda, Chris Fisher, Rolland Larabie and Leo Malette repeatedly skipped meetings in order to force a lack of quorum. Speaking on behalf of his group, Roveda told BayToday in January 2022 that they would only return to the table if “the Mayor removes the notice of motion.”

Wanting to get to months of backlogged business addressed, Savage agreed to the ultimatum in late January 2022. The “role of the CAO” was never discussed again.

But the CAO’s complaint against the municipality was allowed to proceed. This “complaint” appears to have been part of a formal investigation launched by the CAO himself against his own employer alleging unfair treatment.

This revelation was not public knowledge as four councillors in support of the CAO kept all discussions and decisions regarding this investigation in closed sessions throughout 2022.

Last month, when asked why the CAO had seen a salary increase of $43,890 in just two years Mayor Kathleen Thorne-Rochon said that this jump was due to a legal settlement that the city paid it’s CAO.

“In 2023 council had obligations to fulfill in relation to a specific Human Resources file that was negotiated by the previous council.” - Mayor Kathleen Thorne-Rochon

Thorne-Rochon also added that “the bulk of the 2022 increase would also be in relation to this file.”

This appears to be the first time that this legal case was discussed publicly.

This settlement had to be approved in an open session, so council had the discussion at one of the only untelevised meetings of 2023. At the June 20th, 2023 meeting held in North Monetville, an item appeared on the agenda titled “Accept/Approve Compensation report”.

This “compensation report” was related to the ongoing legal dispute between the CAO and the municipality.

No video exists of this meeting however the minutes indicate that Councillor Fern Pellerin and Anne Tessier wanted this important matter deferred so that council or the municipality could get legal advice. This request was defeated.

Council ultimately voted 7-2 (with Tessier and Pellerin opposing) to approve this mysterious compensation report.

I reached out to Thorne-Rochon for more details on this $40,000+ settlement. I also asked for a copy of the “compensation report” but I have not received a response.

No records of any such approval appear in 2022 unless the mayor approved a earlier settlement without council.

It’s an understatement to say that the municipal CAO’s salary has drastically increased over the last several years.

A $43,000 increase in just two years is not normal for this position. Thorne-Rochon’s revelation would explain this as being part of a lump sum settlement.

However in Canada, legal settlements are not typically taxable. So it is not clear why a settlement between the municipality and the CAO would be added to his salary. By adding any settlement to a salary, the city may pay out more than it intends as pensions are often calculated based on earnings.

Personal vs. Public Matter

The disputes between council and it’s CAO in 2021 and 2022 were obvious. It’s understandable why some wanted this out of the public eye.

However, now that the taxpayers are responsible for this large settlement they deserve more information.

Why did this council agree to a settlement on behalf of taxpayers when this could have been dealt with by the courts and avoided conflicts of interests? Allowing this to be handled by the proper legal channels would have revealed if taxpayers actually had to legally compensate municipal administrators for past conflicts.

If councillors were asked to approve a compensation settlement for their own CAO they certainly would have been in an awkward position to say no (as Pellerin and Tessier seemingly did) and risk straining their relationship with this executive.

If this council believed that the CAO was mistreated by the former council, did they take into account both sides and the widely available video evidence of unprofessionalism and bullying coming from one side? If the CAO was so unhappy with his employment and compensation in West Nipissing, did he consider seeking employment elsewhere?

Whatever happened, the public deserves answers more information and certainly a lot more transparency.

The West Nip Voice is a regular newsletter covering issues in West Nipissing and the surrounding area. Please consider becoming a subscriber.