When are rules not rules? When they’re over the top, poorly written, plain silly, and, most importantly, when they’re really not needed.
I have rules pertaining to the rules listed above, which are to expose them and then get rid of them.
I’m also sure the rules protecting so-called confidential conversations at City Hall come under one, or all, of the above, and I sense Calgary Ward 14 Councillor Landon Johnston would agree with me.
That’s why, in the very public feud between Johnston and Mayor Jeromy Farkas, I stand with Johnston.
Johnston first gained fame and busted his chops in 2024, starting a petition to remove former Mayor Jyoti Gondek from office. His petition failed because the Municipal Government Act’s rule is that the required number of signatures is 40% of Calgary’s 2019 population, which would be 514,284 verified signatures. That’s a rule that needs changing.
Johnston collected 69,244 signatures, some not verified, but personally I think not getting the required signatures didn’t bother him too much because I believe removing Gondek wasn’t necessarily his point.
The point was to draw attention to Gondek’s dreadful performance as mayor.
Since being elected, Johnston has been a bee in Farkas’ bonnet, questioning council procedures, rules, and regulations when they needed to be questioned and a vocal opponent of confidential council meetings.
On occasion during council meetings, Farkas has admonished Johnston’s no-holds-barred approach, offering an apology to the councillor several times.
Johnston incurred the mayor’s wrath, as well as that of some councillors and Calgarians, last week when he leaked confidential documents about preliminary budget discussions.
The leak ignited a firestorm of misinformation in Calgary media and social media, prompting the mayor to call a special meeting of council on September 8, saying, “I have reasonable grounds to believe that a serious privacy breach may have occurred, posing potential safety risks to city personnel and significant financial or legal exposure. The meeting was for council to hear immediate legal advice on the potential damage, our obligations, and what action is required to protect employees and taxpayers.”
Johnston, on legal advice, skipped the special meeting, sending a letter to city council, which read, in part, “I do not intend to participate in an escalating political dispute that distracts from the larger issue before Calgarians: how the 2027-2030 budget is being developed, what information the public should receive during that process, and when they should receive it.”
I believe Johnston’s motivation for leaking the documents was to shine a light on the city council’s confidential meetings, which, many times, as in this case, have documents and information Calgarians need to know about.
There are some rules about holding confidential meetings, in particular if agendas infringe on personal privacy, individual or public safety, law enforcement, intergovernmental relations, economic or other interests of the public body, and advice from officials or deliberations involving officials, as laid out by the Access to Information Act.
Other than those, it is solely the council’s decision to call confidential meetings.
City council is not an elite, private club. Sure, membership is limited, but councillors convene at the whim of Calgarians who elected them. They’re well compensated to make the right decisions for Calgarians and to be sure Calgarians know and understand how they are being governed.
Once Calgarians' tax money is collected, it does not belong to council. It’s still Calgarians’ money, and council’s job is to budget the money wisely and tell Calgarians where they propose to spend their money.
There must be more transparency and fewer confidential meetings, plus explanations of what was discussed in those meetings.
In the case of the documents released by Johnston, a lot of gnashing of teeth and the spreading of misinformation could have been prevented. Certainly, sensitive information needs to be protected, but a press release saying city departments’ wish lists would result in a 20.2% tax increase, but council, with the best interests of Calgarians in mind, said no to the requests.
It would be simple, true, harmless, keep Calgarians informed, and improve the perception of city council held by many Calgarians.
As the saying goes, “rules are made to be broken,” but when it comes to Calgary City Council’s confidential meetings, the rules must be reviewed and rewritten.