macphail
12-04-2005, 12:19 AM
Printed from www.thewhig.com (http://www.thewhig.com/) web site Saturday, December 03, 2005 - © 2005 The Kingston Whig-Standard
The donor’s dilemma
The Whig-Standard
Saturday, December 03, 2005 - 07:00
Local News - Kingston’s mayor says the controversy over a $1-million gift and renaming of Market Square highlights a fundraising obstacle the city faces: the inability to maintain the same confidentiality as other institutions.
“You can see the problem we’ve had in this case,” Harvey Rosen said in an interview yesterday.
“Are you going to give a million dollars to the city if you’re going to have a public debate about the appropriateness of the donation and the recognition proposal, or are you doing to give it to a hospital whose board will meet in confidence and be able to discuss it?” he wondered.
“If the donation [to the hospital] is not appropriate, nobody even knows it was in the air and so it saves everybody a lot of embarrassment and removes the possibility of public ridicule.
“I don’t know what you want to call it, but it’s a very uncomfortable and distasteful process for a donor to have to go through.”
Rosen offered his comments after explaining that he did not see until this week an eight-month-old confidential letter addressed to him about the Market Square donation. The letter has been filed by the city in its defence in a court case over the historic square.
The court application seeks to overturn the city decision to rename Market Square.
The letter is now part of a publicly accessible court file. The city filed the letter and other documents roughly two weeks ago.
“The first time I saw that letter was either [Thursday] or the day before,” Rosen told The Whig-Standard.
City councillors have not seen the letter, Rosen said.
“It is a bit strange that the letter never came to me,” the mayor said.
The letter was seen by Mark Segsworth, the senior city manager guiding the Market Square revitalization, Rosen said.
Segsworth declined to comment because of the court case.
This week, the newspaper published excerpts from the March 29 letter, addressed to Rosen at City Hall and signed by Bryon Springer.
In the letter, Springer asks that the city keep confidential all discussions about a proposal that the family give $1 million to a fundraising drive to help pay for a renovation of Market Square.
The city would rename the square, behind City Hall, Springer Market Square in recognition.
Seven days after the letter’s date, King-ston councillors met behind closed doors and considered the proposal for the first time.
One of the councillors at that meeting, Rick Downes, said he was surprised this week to learn of the letter’s existence.
“I have never, ever seen the letter written by Bryon Springer to Mayor Harvey Rosen before reading about in The Kingston Whig-Standard,” Downes said.
He said politicians should have had the letter.
“I don’t like being spoon-fed information, especially on such an important issue as the naming rights of Market Square,” he said.
In the letter, Springer asks Rosen to “please respect our requirement for confidentiality regarding the amount and the agreement to the proposed recognition.”
He states that the family understands that this will be reported to and discussed with councillors but “we trust all will be done in closed session away from the public realm and respecting our desire for confidentiality.”
The letter does not explain why the family requires confidentiality.
Rosen was asked if it is a mistake that the letter did not come to him before council considered the idea.
“I would have been happy to see it but all of the information that was set out in the letter was given to council,” he said. “Every iota of information that was in that document, council had, whether they had the letter or not.”
He would not comment when asked if failure to provide the letter to councillors taints the process.
Rosen was critical of Downes.
“Rick ought not to be speaking about this issue as it’s presently before the courts and it’s an in-camera matter,” he said.
The city has deposited in the public court file many of the confidential memos and reports on the matter.
Rosen said the March 29 letter appears to be the formal commitment to make the $1-million contribution.
“There was a fundraising committee that was basically being served by Queen’s advancement and I think that the approach and the communication was between that organization and the Springers,” he said.
Queen’s office of advancement is a staff-led administrative department that co-ordinates the university’s fundraising efforts.
Rosen said the process was fairly standard in terms of public fundraising.
“I suppose the provincial government is going to have to make a decision in terms of whether municipalities will be able to put themselves in a position to raise funds by conventional means through public appeals,” he said.
Provincial law establishes seven narrow reasons permitting local governments to conduct business behind closed doors.
Two years ago, a watchdog called on the Ontario government to enact stricter rules that ensure greater openness and accountability.
Ontario Privacy commissioner Ann Cavoukian called for the creation of an “open meetings law” to protect the interests of citizens.
“The current rules leave too much room for potential abuse,” she stated in a report that has not been acted on.
Other councillors contacted about the March 29 letter cited the ongoing court case in declining to comment.
“I am not going to discuss this legal matter,” Councillor Beth Pater said.
The case is to go to court in Kingston Jan. 4.
The donor’s dilemma
The Whig-Standard
Saturday, December 03, 2005 - 07:00
Local News - Kingston’s mayor says the controversy over a $1-million gift and renaming of Market Square highlights a fundraising obstacle the city faces: the inability to maintain the same confidentiality as other institutions.
“You can see the problem we’ve had in this case,” Harvey Rosen said in an interview yesterday.
“Are you going to give a million dollars to the city if you’re going to have a public debate about the appropriateness of the donation and the recognition proposal, or are you doing to give it to a hospital whose board will meet in confidence and be able to discuss it?” he wondered.
“If the donation [to the hospital] is not appropriate, nobody even knows it was in the air and so it saves everybody a lot of embarrassment and removes the possibility of public ridicule.
“I don’t know what you want to call it, but it’s a very uncomfortable and distasteful process for a donor to have to go through.”
Rosen offered his comments after explaining that he did not see until this week an eight-month-old confidential letter addressed to him about the Market Square donation. The letter has been filed by the city in its defence in a court case over the historic square.
The court application seeks to overturn the city decision to rename Market Square.
The letter is now part of a publicly accessible court file. The city filed the letter and other documents roughly two weeks ago.
“The first time I saw that letter was either [Thursday] or the day before,” Rosen told The Whig-Standard.
City councillors have not seen the letter, Rosen said.
“It is a bit strange that the letter never came to me,” the mayor said.
The letter was seen by Mark Segsworth, the senior city manager guiding the Market Square revitalization, Rosen said.
Segsworth declined to comment because of the court case.
This week, the newspaper published excerpts from the March 29 letter, addressed to Rosen at City Hall and signed by Bryon Springer.
In the letter, Springer asks that the city keep confidential all discussions about a proposal that the family give $1 million to a fundraising drive to help pay for a renovation of Market Square.
The city would rename the square, behind City Hall, Springer Market Square in recognition.
Seven days after the letter’s date, King-ston councillors met behind closed doors and considered the proposal for the first time.
One of the councillors at that meeting, Rick Downes, said he was surprised this week to learn of the letter’s existence.
“I have never, ever seen the letter written by Bryon Springer to Mayor Harvey Rosen before reading about in The Kingston Whig-Standard,” Downes said.
He said politicians should have had the letter.
“I don’t like being spoon-fed information, especially on such an important issue as the naming rights of Market Square,” he said.
In the letter, Springer asks Rosen to “please respect our requirement for confidentiality regarding the amount and the agreement to the proposed recognition.”
He states that the family understands that this will be reported to and discussed with councillors but “we trust all will be done in closed session away from the public realm and respecting our desire for confidentiality.”
The letter does not explain why the family requires confidentiality.
Rosen was asked if it is a mistake that the letter did not come to him before council considered the idea.
“I would have been happy to see it but all of the information that was set out in the letter was given to council,” he said. “Every iota of information that was in that document, council had, whether they had the letter or not.”
He would not comment when asked if failure to provide the letter to councillors taints the process.
Rosen was critical of Downes.
“Rick ought not to be speaking about this issue as it’s presently before the courts and it’s an in-camera matter,” he said.
The city has deposited in the public court file many of the confidential memos and reports on the matter.
Rosen said the March 29 letter appears to be the formal commitment to make the $1-million contribution.
“There was a fundraising committee that was basically being served by Queen’s advancement and I think that the approach and the communication was between that organization and the Springers,” he said.
Queen’s office of advancement is a staff-led administrative department that co-ordinates the university’s fundraising efforts.
Rosen said the process was fairly standard in terms of public fundraising.
“I suppose the provincial government is going to have to make a decision in terms of whether municipalities will be able to put themselves in a position to raise funds by conventional means through public appeals,” he said.
Provincial law establishes seven narrow reasons permitting local governments to conduct business behind closed doors.
Two years ago, a watchdog called on the Ontario government to enact stricter rules that ensure greater openness and accountability.
Ontario Privacy commissioner Ann Cavoukian called for the creation of an “open meetings law” to protect the interests of citizens.
“The current rules leave too much room for potential abuse,” she stated in a report that has not been acted on.
Other councillors contacted about the March 29 letter cited the ongoing court case in declining to comment.
“I am not going to discuss this legal matter,” Councillor Beth Pater said.
The case is to go to court in Kingston Jan. 4.