Council to take indemnity policy motion out of dirty laundry pile

Councillors Shila Sharps and Ramona Robins during a city council meeting last month. (File photo)

A two-year-old motion to revamp Medicine Hat council’s indemnity policy didn’t require an additional resolution Monday night but it will be getting attention in the coming weeks.

The policy which outlines the processes involved in paying legal fees for council and administration was the subject of an unrealized March 2023 motion.

City solicitor Ben Bullock. (File photo)

“That was overlooked,” said Mayor Linnsie Clark during debate on a similar motion by Coun. Shila Sharps to that made more than two years ago. “City manager (Ann Mitchell) and city solicitor (Ben) Bullock have advised that they missed it and it is intended to come back.”

The city’s indemnity policy was utilized by Mitchell in the fall of 2023 while Clark is currently seeking reimbursement of legal costs related to council’s failed attempt at sanctioning her. Both instances stem from a minor altercation between the two during an August 2023 meeting regarding whether council was following its own bylaws.

In Mitchell’s case, the city manager’s legal counsel issued a cease-and-desist letter to the mayor alleging defamation in November 2023 while she also incurred other unspecified costs throughout the first half of 2024.

However, Mitchell failed to follow the indemnity process outlined in the policy prior to incurring costs. That process should have included obtaining an independent legal opinion before action was taken under section 20 of the policy.

A more than $12,000 independent opinion was obtained with a refusal notice issued to Mitchell’s request to recover more than $6,500 in legal costs.

City council, however, voted to reimburse Mitchell anyway and failed to notify the public of the refusal notice during debate on whether to reimburse the city manager’s legal costs. A freedom of information request by council critic Nicole Frey revealed the information council withheld.

A freedom of information request by council critic Nicole Frey revealing city manager Ann Mitchell receiving a refusal notice for her request for legal fees to be reimbursed (above) and the more than $12,000 invoice for that opinion. Despite the refusal notice, council voted to cover Mitchell’s $6,500 legal bill.

Clark’s own motion to follow the same process to have council cover her legal expenses related to an opinion finding council wasn’t following its own bylaw regarding a corporate restricting and her defence against unwarranted sanctions was again postponed Monday.

Sharps’ motion on Monday sought to allow councillors the ability to seek legal advice without the city manager’s approval. A subsequent amendment by Coun. Andy McGrogan would have adjusted it so as not to overlap with the motion passed more than two years earlier.

“Without direct access to legal advice, (council) might be forced to rely on interpretations provided by administration which could be shaped by institutional interests rather than public welfare,” Sharps stated in support of her motion.

Sharps’ motion failed while McGrogan’s didn’t receive a seconder to the amendment.

Coun. Ramona Robins acknowledged the delay but likened the issue to a child’s dirty sports uniform required to be cleaned post-haste.

“I’m confident it’s being pulled out of the dirty laundry pile now,” said Robins regarding the indemnity-related motion from two years ago.

The motion for a revamped indemnity policy could be in front of council as early as the end of June or as late as the end of September.