The City has responded to allegations made by former director of finance Candie Laporte that the City’s chief administrative officer approved changes to employee payroll without council knowledge and that cost overruns on the fire hall exceed what the City has claimed.
An employee of the city since 2007, Laporte was promoted to director of finance in April 2010. She says after she brought concerns about employee salaries to CAO Brian Carruthers that were not addressed and after writing a letter to council outlining her concerns and requesting a meeting in November, she was terminated “without cause.”
Although the City can’t speak publicly about personnel issues, a document prepared by Laporte’s lawyer suggests communication and management differences coupled with Laporte having written a letter to council indicating it was not receiving “accurate financial information” from Carruthers may have been factors in council’s decision to dismiss her.
“I have full confidence in our CAO and respect what he does,” said Mayor Kerry Cook Friday. “We meet on a regular basis and discuss things on a regular basis and at the end of the day I have full confidence in his management abilities.”
Laporte said she “went through hell,” after being terminated and that under her profession’s code of ethics she could not sit back and do nothing.
Laporte characterized the situation as “… lots of payroll changes that council was not aware of.”
The changes she says were “unilaterally approved” by Carruthers that affected the financial plan for the current year and future years included: (for hourly staff) two service positions salaries increased costing $7,500 per year; two foreman premiums introduced at an additional cost of $16,000 per year; one fireman position increased by $13,000 per year; and the new position of communication co-ordinator at $13,000 per year more than the position made redundant.
However, Cook said the CAO has the authority to adjust hourly employees’ wages to meet union contract obligations and he does not have to bring those changes to the attention of council.
“With the day-to-day operations with the union staff … he has the flexibility to make those changes as long as it fits into the budget,” Cook said. “He can make salary changes on his own as long as the change fits into the budget the City has approved for that fiscal year.”
Carruthers explained that the hourly wages for staff are not determined by him but by a labour management liaison committee and are then signed off by him.
As for specifics, Carruthers noted the union’s collective agreement determines rates. For example, the foreman premium increases and the fireman position, he explained, were changes laid out in the collective agreement and the latter a reflection of increased supervisory duties. He was unaware of the service position changes, suggesting they were incorrect.
The communications position, said Carruthers, replaced an economic development position.
A job reclassification review, a promotion, or greater duties are some reasons for hourly increases, he said.
It is different, however, for management staff; council sets the directives for management salaries and those are approved by council through the budget.
The CAO has the ability to increase management’s rate if it is a routine-rate increase.
Both Cook and Carruthers agreed the City’s greatest cost item is labour.
“That is the cost of doing business,” said Carruthers, adding, “I am accountable to council to balance the budget in accordance with the five-year financial plan.”
The Community Charter, the provincial document that governs municipal affairs, requires that the City be audited every year. By law, each year the City must submit a balanced budget to the provincial government.
In regards to the fire hall, although Laporte acknowledged the contract was “pretty much done” when she took over in 2010, she said the City put an additional $300,000 into the budget to cover cost overruns. She said the $528,000 deficit claimed by the City is in addition to the $300,000 overrun council noted in its 2010 budget and therefore Laporte suggested the overrun is closer to $828,000.
But Cook and Carruthers said the $528,000 overrun includes the initial $300,000 budget deficit that was addressed by council in the 2010 capital budget.
Cook presented an already publicized accounting on the fire hall project, which was budgeted at $6.5 million and included a “floating” contingency fund that was latterly $280,000. When the fire hall was completed, the City was on the hook for a total cost overrun of $528,000.
According to correspondence provided to the Tribune, the fire hall was not among the concerns Laporte expressly wrote to council about.
When asked, Cook indicated Friday was the first time she had heard Laporte raise the issue.
Laporte admitted she didn’t know what the total cost of the fire hall was; the City has calculated the cost at $7,028,034, which is $528,035 over the original budgeted amount of $6.5 million.
“I guess from one angle you could say the project was $6.5 million minus the contingency but that’s ridiculous because, if, at the end of the day, there was still money in the contingency they would have brought back a, b and c items to use up the $6.5 million dollars. Basically we had approval for $6.5 million and at the end of the day the total project was $7 million. There is nothing over and above the $7 million,” Cook said.
The City says its finances are open to the public for inspection and the 2010 financial statements are currently being prepared and will be subject to an external audit in late March and will be available to the public.
When Laporte was removed from her position “without cause” she received approximately $90,000.
Carruthers noted he will further address these issues by appearing as a delegation at tonight’s city council meeting.
