At the July 10 council meeting, I stood to ask five questions — not as a resident, but as a journalist. I introduced myself as press and stated clearly that I was seeking answers based on concerns raised in recent NFNM reporting and the Township’s own published agenda.
I was permitted to ask my questions during the public forum. But despite giving Council every opportunity to respond, they offered no answers. Not one.
This wasn’t an oversight. It was a choice.
The Questions Council Refused to Answer
1. On Procedural Power Shifts
Does the new Procedural Policy increase the Township Clerk’s authority over what gets included on the agenda and excluded from the minutes? What safeguards are in place to ensure accountability to the public?
Council response: None.
2. On Integrity Commissioner’s Dual Role
Section 223.3 of the Municipal Act says the Integrity Commissioner must be independent and impartial. But in North Frontenac, the Integrity Commissioner works at the same law firm that provides legal counsel to the Township. Even if a different lawyer is assigned, doesn’t that create a perceived conflict of interest that undermines public trust?
Council response: None.
3. On Legal Oversight and Public Protection
This kind of dual role is technically allowed under the Municipal Act only if there’s an independent oversight body in place. Since North Frontenac has no such committee, does the Mayor believe the Township is meeting the spirit of the law, or does he accept that residents and the Ombudsman may see this as an integrity failure?
Council response: None.
4. On Infrastructure Deficit and Rink Spending
The Township reports a $4.6 million infrastructure deficit. But when grant-funded projects like the Plevna rink move ahead, they don’t reduce that number because grant money doesn’t count toward closing the gap. Can Council explain why spending is going to high-visibility projects that don’t solve the deficit, while core infrastructure continues to fall behind?
Council response: None.
5. On Missing Public Commentary and Debate (Swastika Motion)
The June minutes include the swastika resolution, but they don’t reflect what actually happened at the meeting. A veteran spoke out against it, the crowd was vocal and engaged, and two councillors openly debated each other. None of that is in the official record. Why is such a significant moment in public discourse being left out of the Township’s minutes?
Council response: None.
Journalism is a Mirror
I don’t ask these questions for personal reasons. I ask them because people in this township want answers — and deserve them. These aren’t gotcha questions. They’re grounded in law, in budget reports, in official documents, and in lived community experience.
Council’s silence wasn’t just disappointing. It was revealing.
If our elected officials can’t or won’t answer direct questions from a local journalist, what does that say about their commitment to transparency?
What Comes Next
The job of journalism is to document, to press, and to keep pressing. Whether the answers come now or later, they will come — the public isn’t going away, and neither is NFNM.
I’ll continue to report. I’ll continue to show up. And I’ll continue asking the questions that matter, whether Council likes them or not.
